Is There a Final Theory of Everything? | Episode 309 | Closer To Truth

[@Grandunifiedcelery]

2:07 Steven Weinberg 7:26 David Gross 11:50 Robert Laughlin 15:35 Stephen Wolfram 20:13 Frank Wilczek

[@BobStBubba]

I'm enjoying these, Mr. Kuhn, and for a seemingly committed Deist, you seem to have a reasonably open mind, and are asking good questions. But at the end of this one....well, jeez, here we are, back again, at the basic confusion: The speck of greenish mold on a discarded orange: The one imagining that the orange, and the tree which produced it, and the 4 billion-year-old earth on which it evolved, and the sea, and the light from the sun -- an average star and one of half a trillion, in a galaxy which is one of a trillion trillion trillion -- were all put here for the benefit -- and Enlightenment -- of the speck of fungus on the orange. But neither our observations nor our understanding is required. It'd be nice if we got it all figgered before our species disappears -- but if we don't? Oh well. Life -- or the absence of it -- goes on. We'd dearly LOVE to be more Important -- which creates our blinding bias: We can't imagine an Answer unless it includes Us, to ask the Question. That doesn't mean that I'm not a fan of the series. But if I wasn't? That wouldn't matter much, either.

[@Grandunifiedcelery]

David Gross "...the questions are almost as interesting often than the answers, and questions are almost as difficult to discover as the answers to those questions. So, I have no illusion that I can imagine all the questions that people will be asking a hundred years from now, and therefore this could go on forever. On the other hand, it might end. Who knows?"

[@bozo5632]

Just please don't send it to Sabine.

[@checkmilu]

@@bozo5632 Sabine is a physicist but at much lower level in comparison to Michio and other leading physicists. My brother-in-law has multiple post-PhDs and teaches physics at multiple universities around the world but he is still consider himself to be a long long way off the greatest minds in physics. KZbin is great for everyone to learn from the greatest minds but also misleading people by exposing them to mediocrity and fake news. You have to do research yourself and have your own judgement.

[@bozo5632]

@@checkmilu You have to sing my comment for it to make sense. (Michio Kaku? Really?)

[@SaraHovera]

Dr.Kuhn really ages well. He's so charismatic, curious and swift even in 70s. RIP Prof.Weinberg 🙏

[@iamthemailman0867]

We decided to eat from the tree of all knowing, but didn’t consider whether or not we could even comprehend it all in our 3 dimensional selves. All very interesting though and I look forward to seeing how close we can get!

[@MySonicDragon]

Thanks for this series Robert 👍

[@garybala000]

You cannot arrive at a “final theory of everything” without first “knowing” everything. And such a prospect is highly dubious for us mere mortals forever locked into our particular space-time matrix. We may ultimately be left with several theories or laws which apply, though quite well, within their own unique realm - quantum laws, relativity laws, and one or two other bodies of laws governing their own realm. Hawking suggested as much.

[@tberrardy]

Excellent as usual!

[@mikekay6789]

So glad to see the much better production qualities....I can now enjoy watching these again.

[@rupinjeremiah9589]

He says he doesn't want Science to end by 'Final Theory' he wants to end the process of asking why. But that is exactly the essence of Science. If we stop asking why, we have finished Science.

[@AReallyLongAndUnremakableUser]

Why does everything need a theory?

[@Deliya81]

nothing needs a theory. it's a way for us humans to grasp reality

[@projectmalus]

@@Deliya81 To develop wonderful consumer products that reproduce reality, a proxy that is needed since reality itslf is too blindingly powerful.

[@AReallyLongAndUnremakableUser]

Is it only a 'reality', Because so many people believe this to be 'true'?

[@projectmalus]

@@AReallyLongAndUnremakableUser Yes, like a DAC in a stereo reassembles by sampling bits into analog, the music. And language replicates it again in a weaker field, verbs and nouns the 1 and 0 elements that are modulated to produce an analog understanding. Cheers.

[@drakliveplays]

Because we don't know the answers. Sometimes theories leads to answers. We humans loves to think a lot and questions everything.

[@jamesbentonticer4706]

Cryogenically freeze me and wake me when we have the answer please

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

Be careful what you wish for because you may never wake up!

[@jamesbentonticer4706]

@@paulbrocklehurst2346 haha yeah that's true. I just kidding though.

[@philippemartin6081]

@@paulbrocklehurst2346 Hello my Brother Paul, no one will be hurt, as différents belived, different faith, difference is so Healty, but politesse is so more nicer. I like politesse. Philippe Martin 😎

[@osks]

“That’s the whole problem with science - you’ve got a bunch of empiricists trying to describe things of unimaginable wonder” - Calvin of Calvin & Hobbes, the 6-year old philosopher…

[@mags102755]

This was great. All of this made sense to me. I know, as Neil DeGrasse Tyson says, the universe is under no obligation to make sense to me. But these views made sense.

[@spiralsun1]

How do you know that the universe is not at least under obligation to make sense to someone? Anyone? Maybe it does.

[@peterdorn5799]

think max planck, had it right. : consciousness is fundamental, matter is derivative

[@tradeup1158]

Consciousness is a product of matter and combination of it ..nothing else ..it does not exist independent

[@peterdorn5799]

@@tradeup1158 I like to think it is the other way around, matter is another form of consciousness

[@tradeup1158]

@@peterdorn5799 ok , can you think that a stone or glass of water is consciousness? If not ..it means it must have the right combination of matter to be ..this lead to matter creates consciousness. Your mind can not exist without a brain ( matter in right combo)

[@Two_But_Not_Two]

Yeah, I think so too: the material universe is a subset of fundamental consciousness. So even if we do eventually achieve a theory of everything as it pertains to the material universe, it doesn't even begin to address the larger questions.

[@tradeup1158]

@@Two_But_Not_Two your consciousness is just an nececary part for you to survive..so that universe was set for create consciousness is an illusion. Feat, love, hunger , social consciouness is all part of decide who you are in compare to othet and the interaktion betweeb you and the world for benefit you in the best way . Nice felings is often god gor you and your chance to survive and reproduce . Every Living form is consciousness in difrent level but they all are . They are at the level it needs for them to survive and reproduce. A human can not just think about hunger and love ..it needs to understand other people and ther plan and needs for you to understand how to manish the best outcome for you. You can be a nice person ..but often only if it does not interfer with your safety, survive chans and reproduce ability. So long this parts is succefully achived the person can give and be nice to people and animal. A good feling for ex love drives you in a direction like to take care of your children ..so they survive and feel good..this makes your DNA to survive ..so the consciouness fealing of love is a programed fealing that increase your chance ..but you feel like it is a choise and an consciousness act. It is an consciouness thing ..but the consciousness is not a magic supernatural thing ..it is just a way to undertand the world for your best intress. So consciouness is real but it is an product of evolution.

[@cash4chaos]

Let there be light, that pretty much explains it all.

[@baraskparas]

The discovery of a fundamental particle is the great achievement that will in the future make a theory of everything possible. It will involve an eternal universe and the 4th dimension outside the space time we can see.

[@amandayorke481]

This sounds, er, sort of RELIGIOUS??? As a Christian, all I can say is, Good luck with that!!!

[@baraskparas]

@@amandayorke481 I must say it would falsify a lot of the standard model as well as cosmology so the best response I had was “ nice idea but no evidence “ from a professor at Nottingham. I believe in freedom of religion so good luck to you. The proposal of an undiscovered particle is not based on religion but an attempt to account for observations that have no explanation or inadequate explanation. When you grow up you might ditch that fake cliche “ Good luck with that” because it could have been said to W Pauli when he postulated the neutrino or Dirac when he postulated the antiparticle.

[@mitcharndt8791]

According to the double slit exp and in a way fractals, it looks like we will just keep creating more depth the further we chose to go. Wich is good to me this is too exciting

[@PrivateSi]

No it does not, it points to a simple base subspace field of +ve charge cells held together by free-flowing -ve charge... 1 force, 2 particles... a UNIFYING binary field theory.... the best kind of unified field theory.. This is all that is needed to emerge a more coherent, integrated Standard Model with far fewer (ie. only 2) made up 'particles' that have not been / cannot be detected.. SM has many more.. Gravity naturally emerges from the quantised base charge field (the EM, Strong Gravitational Field) and (a component of) Dark Energy.. Double slit results make total sense to me...

[@michaelpumo83]

Does anyone know the piano piece at the end of this video, please?

[@wesboundmusic]

I may have said this before: the opening theme is spectacular! And so is your channel, of course. Very thought provoking stuff.

[@matthanna100]

Funny, but the opening music is annoying to me. It shows how subjective music is.

[@joesands8860]

Same way some people love the thumping of rap music and it drives me absolutely CRAZY.

[@Bill..N]

Outstanding.! Five highly accomplished experts weighing in, and only Dr. Wolfram diverges from the consensus that a final description could take from many mellinium to NEVER..His theories are engaging and certainly there are examples of simple lines of computer code manipulated to generate stunning complexity, but how can Wolfram physics EVER be tested for validity.? It can't just ACCOUNT for existing observations either, but make NEW and verifiable predictions, or account for a phenomenon not presently explained..Great show..

[@journalsofjadednews1108]

When we realize that, The esoteric knowledge of Consciousness isn't an equation that needs to be worked out, But a frequency we use to identify and record our actions in the ether. That old saying, " Nothing New Under The Sun"... When we combine our knowledge of space-time the ether, consciousness and physics general and quantum, Then we will be in a better place to discover a unified theory.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

we don't know that consciousness isn't an equation? that is speculation on your part, that makes the rest of what you say, which is frankly nonsense, nonsense.

[@BitupanGogoi-m3f]

I see myself in you Robert Lawrence Kuhn sir, love you very much, love your work, I can feel how uncomfortable you feel for not knowing the WHY yet, coz I feel the same

[@chanmeenachandramouli1623]

Me too:-) MeenaC

[@BitupanGogoi-m3f]

@@chanmeenachandramouli1623 good to know that ;)

[@AgarioSplitrunner]

A theory of everything (TOE), final theory, ultimate theory, or master theory is a hypothetical single, all-encompassing, coherent theoretical framework of physics that fully explains and links together all physical aspects of the universe. Finding a TOE is one of the major unsolved problems in physics. String theory and M-theory have been proposed as theories of everything. Over the past few centuries, two theoretical frameworks have been developed that, together, most closely resemble a TOE. These two theories upon which all modern physics rests are general relativity and quantum mechanics. General relativity is a theoretical framework that only focuses on gravity for understanding the universe in regions of both large scale and high mass: stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies, etc. On the other hand, quantum mechanics is a theoretical framework that only focuses on three non-gravitational forces for understanding the universe in regions of both small scale and low mass: sub-atomic particles, atoms, molecules, etc. Quantum mechanics successfully implemented the Standard Model that describes the three non-gravitational forces - strong nuclear, weak nuclear, and electromagnetic force - as well as all observed elementary particles. General relativity and quantum mechanics have been thoroughly proven in their separate fields of relevance. Since the usual domains of applicability of general relativity and quantum mechanics are so different, most situations require that only one of the two theories be used. However, the two theories are considered incompatible in regions of extremely small scale - the Planck scale - such as those that exist within a black hole or during the beginning stages of the universe (i.e., the moment immediately following the Big Bang). To resolve the incompatibility, a theoretical framework revealing a deeper underlying reality, unifying gravity with the other three interactions, must be discovered to harmoniously integrate the realms of general relativity and quantum mechanics into a seamless whole: the TOE is a single theory that, in principle, is capable of describing all phenomena in the universe. In pursuit of this goal, quantum gravity has become one area of active research. One example is string theory, which evolved into a candidate for the TOE, but not without drawbacks (most notably, its lack of currently testable predictions) and controversy. String theory posits that at the beginning of the universe (up to 10−43 seconds after the Big Bang), the four fundamental forces were once a single fundamental force. According to string theory, every particle in the universe, at its most microscopic level (Planck length), consists of varying combinations of vibrating strings (or strands) with preferred patterns of vibration. String theory further claims that it is through these specific oscillatory patterns of strings that a particle of unique mass and force charge is created (that is to say, the electron is a type of string that vibrates one way, while the up quark is a type of string vibrating another way, and so forth).

[@AgarioSplitrunner]

Good subtitles

[@jareknowak8712]

Final Theory can be elegant and simple, but infinite!

[@tyamada21]

A segment from 'Saved by the Light of the Buddha Within'... My new understandings of what many call 'God -The Holy Spirit' - resulting from some of the extraordinary ongoing after-effects relating to my NDE... Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what some scientists are now referring to as the unified field of consciousnesses. In other words, it’s the essence of all existence and non-existence - the ultimate creative force behind planets, stars, nebulae, people, animals, trees, fish, birds, and all phenomena, manifest or latent. All matter and intelligence are simply waves or ripples manifesting to and from this core source. Consciousness (enlightenment) is itself the actual creator of everything that exists now, ever existed in the past, or will exist in the future - right down to the minutest particles of dust - each being an individual ripple or wave. The big difference between chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo and most other conventional prayers is that instead of depending on a ‘middleman’ to connect us to our state of inner enlightenment, we’re able to do it ourselves. That’s because chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo allows us to tap directly into our enlightened state by way of this self-produced sound vibration. ‘Who or What Is God?’ If we compare the concept of God being a separate entity that is forever watching down on us, to the teachings of Nichiren, it makes more sense to me that the true omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence of what most people perceive to be God, is the fantastic state of enlightenment that exists within each of us. Some say that God is an entity that’s beyond physical matter - I think that the vast amount of information continuously being conveyed via electromagnetic waves in today’s world gives us proof of how an invisible state of God could indeed exist. For example, it’s now widely known that specific data relayed by way of electromagnetic waves has the potential to help bring about extraordinary and powerful effects - including an instant global awareness of something or a mass emotional reaction. It’s also common knowledge that these invisible waves can easily be used to detonate a bomb or to enable NASA to control the movements of a robot as far away as the Moon or Mars - none of which is possible without a receiver to decode the information that’s being transmitted. Without the receiver, the data would remain impotent. In a very similar way, we need to have our own ‘receiver’ switched on so that we can activate a clear and precise understanding of our own life, all other life and what everything else in existence is. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day helps us to achieve this because it allows us to reach the core of our enlightenment and keep it switched on. That’s because Myoho-Renge-Kyo represents the identity of what scientists now refer to as the unified field of consciousnesses. To break it down - Myoho represents the Law of manifestation and latency (Nature) and consists of two alternating states. For example, the state of Myo is where everything in life that’s not obvious to us exists - including our stored memories when we’re not thinking about them - our hidden potential and inner emotions whenever they’re dormant - our desires, our fears, our wisdom, happiness, karma - and more importantly, our enlightenment. The other state, ho, is where everything in Life exists whenever it becomes evident to us, such as when a thought pops up from within our memory - whenever we experience or express our emotions - or whenever a good or bad cause manifests as an effect from our karma. When anything becomes apparent, it merely means that it’s come out of the state of Myo (dormancy/latency) and into a state of ho (manifestation). It’s the difference between consciousness and unconsciousness, being awake or asleep, or knowing and not knowing. The second law - Renge - Ren meaning cause and ge meaning effect, governs and controls the functions of Myoho - these two laws of Myoho and Renge, not only function together simultaneously but also underlies all spiritual and physical existence. The final and third part of the tri-combination - Kyo, is the Law that allows Myoho to integrate with Renge - or vice versa. It’s the great, invisible thread of energy that fuses and connects all Life and matter - as well as the past, present and future. It’s also sometimes termed the Universal Law of Communication - perhaps it could even be compared with the string theory that many scientists now suspect exists. Just as the cells in our body, our thoughts, feelings and everything else is continually fluctuating within us - all that exists in the world around us and beyond is also in a constant state of flux - constantly controlled by these three fundamental laws. In fact, more things are going back and forth between the two states of Myo and ho in a single moment than it would ever be possible to calculate or describe. And it doesn’t matter how big or small, famous or trivial anything or anyone may appear to be, everything that’s ever existed in the past, exists now or will exist in the future, exists only because of the workings of the Laws ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ - the basis of the four fundamental forces, and if they didn’t function, neither we nor anything else could go on existing. That’s because all forms of existence, including the seasons, day, night, birth, death and so on, are moving forward in an ongoing flow of continuation - rhythmically reverting back and forth between the two fundamental states of Myo and ho in absolute accordance with Renge - and by way of Kyo. Even stars are dying and being reborn under the workings of what the combination ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’ represents. Nam, or Namu - which mean the same thing, are vibrational passwords or keys that allow us to reach deep into our life and fuse with or become one with ‘Myoho-Renge-Kyo’. On a more personal level, nothing ever happens by chance or coincidence, it’s the causes that we’ve made in our past, or are presently making, that determine how these laws function uniquely in each of our lives - as well as the environment from moment to moment. By facing east, in harmony with the direction that the Earth is spinning, and chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo for a minimum of, let’s say, ten minutes daily to start with, any of us can experience actual proof of its positive effects in our lives - even if it only makes us feel good on the inside, there will be a definite positive effect. That’s because we’re able to pierce through the thickest layers of our karma and activate our inherent Buddha Nature (our enlightened state). By so doing, we’re then able to bring forth the wisdom and good fortune that we need to challenge, overcome and change our adverse circumstances - turn them into positive ones - or manifest and gain even greater fulfilment in our daily lives from our accumulated good karma. This also allows us to bring forth the wisdom that can free us from the ignorance and stupidity that’s preventing us from accepting and being proud of the person that we indeed are - regardless of our race, colour, gender or sexuality. We’re also able to see and understand our circumstances and the environment far more clearly, as well as attract and connect with any needed external beneficial forces and situations. As I’ve already mentioned, everything is subject to the law of Cause and Effect - the ‘actual-proof-strength’ resulting from chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo always depends on our determination, sincerity and dedication. For example, the levels of difference could be compared to making a sound on a piano, creating a melody, producing a great song, and so on. Something else that’s very important to always respect and acknowledge is that the Law (or if you prefer God) is in everyone and everything. NB: There are frightening and disturbing sounds, and there are tranquil and relaxing sounds. It’s the emotional result of any noise or sound that can trigger off a mood or even instantly change one. When chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo each day, we are producing a sound vibration that’s the password to our true inner-self - this soon becomes apparent when you start reassessing your views on various things - such as your fears and desires etc. The best way to get the desired result when chanting is not to view things conventionally - rather than reaching out to an external source, we need to reach into our own lives and bring our needs and desires to fruition from within - including the good fortune and strength to achieve any help that we may need. Chanting Nam-Myoho-Renge-Kyo also reaches out externally and draws us towards, or draws towards us, what we need to make us happy from our environment. For example, it helps us to be in the right place at the right time - to make better choices and decisions and so forth. We need to think of it as a seed within us that we’re watering and bringing sunshine to for it to grow, blossom and bring forth fruit or flowers. It’s also important to understand that everything we need in life, including the answer to every question and the potential to achieve every dream, already exists within us.

[@louisbullard6135]

I believe in the end the ultimate theory is never going to be why but why not.

[@philippemartin6081]

Hi Everyone, sorry about missing too many show. But I alowded to connect again. The best show ever.😎♒🌻🎵🎶 Philippe Martin love you all

[@josephhruby3225]

Spectacular

[@anthonynewton7435]

I really think that the educated experts are all over complicating this search and only thinking from our human perspective. It's like expecting my dog trying to explain how my car works! Higher dimensional logic is the only way to get answers. Creation perspective and motives etc. Everything that is,does have a theory. The reality behind the original physical universe is my brick wall at present.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

how do you know higher dimensional logic (whatever that might be), is the only way to get answers? also using the words creation perspective and motive are kinda pointing toward some kind of intelligent beginning to the universe. you can't assume that.

[@ujjwalbhattarai8670]

What we see that is truth.

[@stevelenores5637]

A theory is conceptual idea constructed in the human mind. Because we ourselves are limited there can be no theory of everything.

[@chrisgreen8803]

We know the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe and everything.... It’s 42

[@veliborb]

Douglas Adams already explained it

[@cosmikrelic4815]

how original.

[@rambansal7630]

Chris, can you please explain 42?

[@chrisgreen8803]

@@rambansal7630 It’s from the book “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy” By Douglas Adams

[@AliImran-ut7mv]

The computer said that sarcastically...don't know why everyone seems to ignore that.

[@jamesrarathoon2235]

The standard model doesn't "explain elementary particles" at best it describes some of their properties.

[@edwardcasas2137]

Love this channel keep it up.

[@sybr3602]

When you think a thought. What happens in between the thought? Is a thought a particle or a wave? Can a thought be split? And enter a quantum state of multi-dimentionality? And who is doing the thinking? Matter? Or anti-matter? Is anti-matter the "gap" in between the thoughts?

[@kevinfairweather3661]

Great !

[@immortalsofar7977]

Time causes gravity. There, that's the only hint I'm providing for the grand unified field theory.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

A theory of causation in universe would be great.

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

_'If there is only one way for the universe to be, why is this one way so suited for human life?'_ *Because if it wasn't that way we wouldn't be here would we?* (& how can you know that there couldn't be far _better_ ways than the _human_ way of existing - at least in principle?)

[@freedomseeker351]

I wonder if there is any living being anywhere in the Universe with higher IQ than human beings to unvail the Truth of Creation. Science has so failed miserably to establish the existence of extraterrestrial. Therefore, do we have any other option but to remain content with what is written in our Scriptures?

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

@@freedomseeker351 There's nothing very interesting written in most scriptures (Christian / Islamic ones anyway)

[@eugenepohjola258]

Howdy. I would say it depends of the framework or paradigm within one is exploring. Newton, Kepler and Leibniz worked within the framework that speeds are no more than say 95% of that of light. Einstein worked inside the paradigm that one is outside the Event Horizon. And so on ... Regards.

[@chanmeenachandramouli1623]

I always wondered if all the authentic saints of the world would know the answers to everything & also, would they know all the physics, chemistry & whatnots that rule the universe too or just their own domains alone?. Only questions, not many proper answers, it appears everywhere, Sir. MeenaC

[@princesizwe2952]

They would know

[@Exception1]

what's the name of that piano piece in the background at the end?

[@arikingooo]

The Final rule is and has always been with us. All we have to do is discover it. It's like Jesus who came but the jews still expecting him. But again, I believe it will be revealed with the unification of humanity & the World.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

so whose right the christians or the jews, or perhaps neither. what does unification of humanity and the world look like? sounds like nonsense to me.

[@arikingooo]

@@cosmikrelic4815 you're not getting the point or you're allowing yourself to get biased. The final Theory isn't in the future but has always been with us. We'll figure it out or they'll be a general consensus as our differences blurs out.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

@@arikingooo of course it is in the future, we haven't found it yet so it is in the future. What's so hard about that?

[@arikingooo]

@@cosmikrelic4815 of course not. It's already here and was known even by the ancients. As long as there are theoretical differences among scientists. Nothing rings true.

[@MrBentheretwo]

Somewhere in the fifth dimension, a kid has his universe game taking away, and everything goes dark, and we are no more

[@analyticeschatology4143]

A final theory of everything can only be explained by an understanding of consciousness and not an explanation of the regularities in physics. Physical reality itself is in consciousness and so until you can understand consciousness, you won't understand what ultimate realiy is. To think that physics can provide the answer about what ultimate reality is, is to make the mistake of thinking that matter is more fundamental than consciousness. That is where all materialists get it wrong

[@cosmikrelic4815]

you have no evidence for any of this.

[@analyticeschatology4143]

@@cosmikrelic4815 what exactly would count as evidence for you ?

[@cosmikrelic4815]

@@analyticeschatology4143 i don't know, but i'm not the one making the claim. if your claim is true you must have evidence, what is your best evidence?

[@mintakan003]

Went through Sean Carroll's pandemic lockdown lecture series. Quantum Field Theory (QFT), comes closest to a "final theory". It unites quantum mechanics with special relativity. (But the math is not necessarily simple.) The next step is reconciling with general relativity, i.e. quantum physics with gravity. This is usually what is meant by a "grand unified theory", to unite the four fundamental forces in physics. This is not the same as explaining "everything", even just within physics. There are still some very *fundamental* problems in physics. E.g., the "measurement problem" in quantum mechanics. What is "dark matter" and "dark energy" (most of the stuff in the universe) ... Sabine Hossenfelder has a video on this. She suggests a different approach. Instead of trying to find the ultimate elegant beautiful symmetric logical theory, brute forcing your way into it, from preconceptions, ... pick on an outstanding problem instead. Do actual experiments. Probe the reality. It is possible nature will reveal something new and surprising. This can be the opening to re-envision everything, change paradigm, make progress on a deeper theory. In the history of science, fundamental progress is made, usually when picking on these "anomalies".

[@jerrymuns]

Not until we truly understand consciousness.

[@user-jt6ej7vh2p]

*Brain

[@Northwind82]

Rather than squeeze it out of the picture.

[@labidifaycal3185]

I have the theory which also take in consideration the weak and failures of thaught and consciousness.

[@Existential_Bengali]

​@@labidifaycal3185publish your theory.

[@Buzz_Kill71]

I take it you are one that believes consciousness to be fundamental...?😮

[@joshua3171]

I personally don't think so, as this would just be a starting point which opens up a lot of deeper realizations, who's gods god?

[@joshua3171]

or like the difference between a king and an emperor we just bristow another title upon an existing reality solely for the pre existing prestige?

[@eltatoyo9211]

"Who knows", best answer.

[@nelsonrosasaguilera3425]

Yes, 42. Got em

[@cosmikrelic4815]

not very original.

[@nelsonrosasaguilera3425]

The computer said you wouldn't like it

[@ats-3693]

We all knew that this comment had to be left by one of us, I was prepared to do it but Nelson had it covered.

[@mybrothercomes1088]

Yes. NE=42^π

[@engelbertus1406]

A Theory of Everything should properly predict its own discovery

[@cerimite7674]

"Is there a theory of everything?"; that is a moot question. This is like asking that question 100 years ago. We know very little of the foundations of life, even today.

[@maverick1972]

Maybe it's not even a single theory. Maybe seven or 42 or 144 theories that are all independent of each other and all others, working on their exclusive domains but just incidentally happen to work synergistically. My own final theory is that

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

The think is that until, we found, some evidence, to reject the theory’s, can be negotiable and find the ways to resolve, and fixed , so until then, we have a lots of work to do and teaching the new ideas to the thirsty students of science, philosophy, cosmology, brains, consciousness, and spirituality, and etc......

[@Levon9404]

In reality there will be one theory of everything, what we know and what we don't know everything is founded on energy start from tiny atoms always to giant stars, what actually we need to complete that how space produces energy and and how long space does that none stopped, that will give us window of everything. Because rest of the stuff on earth or other planets they are by product and characteristics of energy.

[@kimsahl8555]

TOE - yes, but it is not a particle theory but a theory include the particles.

[@gerardoquirogagoode8152]

We've known for decades from Quantum Field Theory (Zeh) that quantum fields are behind everything, that they extend unbounded, nonlocal and continuous. The Fundamental question is: what's behind quantum fields ??? We're not far to find the Theory of everything, the ground theory or the unified theory but that only applies to this particular Spacetime/Matter Reality Box. Yet, I suspect It's not along this Timeline. Thus, we have to shift Timelines in a steepest descent manner to come across the right one. For that, we need to develop MetaIntelligence further. Nevertheless, we have to realize there are higher Reality Boxes above the Quantum Reality Box 99.7% of people talk from the Sphere of Assumptions 0.2% of people talk from the Sphere of KNOWING 0.1% of people talk from the Sphere of BEING

[@amandayorke481]

This seems to be where physics and philosophy meet ... surely, there is always the unknowable ...and we know what scientists have to say about THAT - Something that can't be measured or quantified!

[@matterasmachine]

simple explanation: mathematics does not describe the world, it describes statistics of the world

[@credterfe]

Physical pursuits lead to physical results that answer the How but not the Why ( the reason, the justification , the ultimate origin ) .

[@matterasmachine]

@@credterfe because speed of light is constant answers why, not how.

[@martinchitembo1883]

As far as the propositions of mathematics refer to reality they are not certain and as far as they are certain they they don't refer to reality too

[@credterfe]

Theory of everything :- God the underlying principle and substance of all matter and spirits.

[@philippemartin6081]

Juste like this alot still have to be done, alot still to finish.

[@username6135]

If a system is self-referential it is circular logic thus uncogent thus illogical thus self-referential. Phi 101, folks.

[@GG-hu9dn]

There is a theory of everything. It's called "Consciousness"!

[@justinebjork617]

Or maybe there is another answer? Maybe life as we know it has adapted to the conditions on earth? In my opinion all matter is alive. Everything is alive without having the features of life. On other planets, under different conditions, there may be another form of life not necessarily as we define it. People focus too much on the earthly perception of life and the perception of the universe. Life is a process, everything is a process, therefore math is the basis here.

[@wisdomcompassion5060]

Electromegnetic is only fundamental force in universe. The whole universe is based in electromegnetic force.

[@tp5776]

Is darkness matter? Darkness does not appear or disappear, it is always there. Only light comes and goes.

[@slapmeisterrecords8226]

Wolframs limited number of decades are somewhat discouraging

[@ThatisnotHair]

Finding thyním for exīool is why l am here

[@wayneasiam65]

Whether ONE Universe or many, the FONT OF ALL may still be contemplating Its own beginning...

[@cameronlakeview7068]

Why is the universe so badly configured for 3 headed Cyclops termite gerbil daisy mushroom chickens? That's what I want to know.

[@grumpytroll6918]

Not until you get closer to truth.

[@cosmikrelic4815]

what do these beasts require that the universe has not provided?

[@PrivateSi]

Logical rigidity the way Weinberg described it is dogmatic... I'd be happy with a theory that is less dependent on ALL constants being exactly what they are Wolfram's approach is too digital and non-physical Wilczek's multiple fields of QFT scales very poorly and is the opposite of a UNIFYING field theory, my kind of unified field theory High energy physics will just blow larger and larger chunks of + holes in the quantised subspace field and confuse itself and QFT -- This conceptual model outlines rough mathematical relationships. Anyone is welcome to try and link it all together with the Standard Model math.. QCD and QFT need to be combined and reformulated but it is fully compatible with QED and GR. -- Bottom-up Thought Experiment... Constraints: As few base forces and particles as possible to form a coherent, integrated 3D multi/universe model -- Subspace Charge Field: +ve charge cells (quanta, +1) held together by free-flowing -ve charge. Matter-energy field conserves momentum Matter-Energy: Matter is focused energy.. Energy is mobile matter.. Momentum conserves velocity.. Force changes velocity and/or direction Positron/Up Quark/Graviton (p+): Out of place, free cell warps the field and sends out AC field cell vibration 'blip' spheres at C + 6 spin loops Electron/Down Quark (e-): Hole left behind warps the field and sends out AC field cell vibration 'blip' spheres of opposite phase at C + 6 spin loops Neutrino/Dark Matter (n+-): Only exactly opposite phase p+ and e- annihilate (ie. pairs created together), else a neutrino forms Nucleons: Proton: P = pep.. Neutron: N = Pe = pep,e.. Beta-: e.. Beta+: B = p,n = p,pe.. Alpha: A = PNPN = PeP,PeP = (pep,e,pep)(pep,e,pep) Heavier Fermions: Larger holes and chunks of subspace field rapidly disintegrate to p+s, e-s, n+-s and/or annihilate to regular = empty field Electrostatic Force: Recoiling blip spheres propagate. Opposite direction + and - blips form a vibrating AC bond, same sign=phase repel Instant-Off Long Force: AC (longitudinally blipping) subspace 'flux tube' as thin as 1 cell wide. Each cell and its -ve charge move in contrary motion Spin: e-s and p+s pull in the 12 surrounding cells, or -ve charge that pulls cells, that then bounce out, forming 6 loops as a torus. Spins up/down Strong Force: Spin loops merge and form flowing DC circuits between e-s and p+s Mass: Sum of the lengths of all strong force bonds + near electric field. Neutrino has compact strong force bonds, Protons' are long as 2 p+s repel Magnetism: Some spin-aligned atoms' p+s and e-s' strong bonds join in a shorter straight path. Energy conservation results in external force circuits Weak Force: Geometric structural charge balance instability. Possibly neutrino hits statistically tipping the balance Photon: Charged particle(s) moving up and down (transmitter, atomic electron) form a radiating transverse wave blip pattern Double Slit: Laser light / particle centre's preceding, extended subspace distortion diffracts, interferes, forming wave guides observation destroys Dark Gravity: p+ traps 1 quantum of -ve charge so void cell size/gap grows (and matter's shrinks?) forming a macro -ve charge gradient Bang Expansion: Loss of -ve charge to the multiverse?.. Bang ejector velocity petered out, magnified in time by outward momentum conservation Gravity Wave: Longitudinal wave where the entire field in a large region is effected in unison for a duration Big Ping: A dark crystal universe collisions' intense gravity wave forms e- & p+ pairs from outside in at C. Many annihilate or form neutrinos Big Bang: Ping wave collides centrally? Field blast forms matter + a large hole (then Big/Dark Refill)? Fast -ve charge loss? Neutrino crystal exploded? Black Hole: Absorbs matter and energy. Neutrino crystal (with a core returning to empty field)? Large hole in the field traps anything entering? Frame Dragging: Entire sphere of subspace cells rotating around a point in unison Time: Cell to cell blips take a constant time. Gravity shrinks cells so light slows but locally measures C as circuits lengthen in space & time, adding mass -- This is not an aether theory, it's a matter-energy field, a quantised, relativisitic subspace medium. Forces and matter emerge from and are part of the field -- Makes more sense than making up bosons to carry force and mass, quarks that don't solve the anti-matter and dark matter problem, anti-neutrinos, loads of fundamental fields, extra spatial and temporal dimensions etc, that ultimately don't tie relativity and quantum mechanics together properly or well... They should at least be honest and call their 'spatial dimensions' geometric/field dimensions or something.. Magic Space is not my cup of tea.

[@nerdi_brilliantidea3314]

Knowledge is brilliant so I ask myself why has not one individual want to pay the deficit of USA that worth twenty eight TRILLION dollar debt.

[@karlthetrader]

Eine Zahl erklärt absolut alles - nein, nicht die 42... Die ultimative Zahl ist ZEN!

[@cosmikrelic4815]

what evidence do you have for that statement?

[@karlthetrader]

@@cosmikrelic4815 ask a Zen master

[@cosmikrelic4815]

@@karlthetrader i'm asking you. i don't know any zen masters.

[@fractalnomics]

Yes. Fractals all the way down.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Did u see the Sierpinski triangle on wolframs wall?

[@anthony212459]

This dudes videos are all the same change my mind.

[@stargod3064]

To only believe what you observe, visible light is a pinpoint of what is out there, Not to mention the different spectrums of vision there are. These men are ignorant and stubborn and that’s what is preventing them from getting the answers they seek.

[@TheTroofSayer]

At 25:14 - "If there is only one way that the world had to be, why is this one way so suited for human life? Or if there is no one way that the world had to be, why is our world so suited for human life?" Not sure that an anthropocentric narrative is helpful. If a planet is predisposed to life, then, given sufficient time, it will predispose to INTELLIGENT life. Intelligent Design (ID) was onto something until they went all creationist on us. On their website, ID's Discovery Institute has a link to Human Exceptionalism (HE). Nothing has been as detrimental to the advance of the life sciences as HE. It is so when people speak in terms of "man made in God's image." And it is so when we speak in terms of human free will vs animal instinct. I hope we can resist going the same route as ID.

[@jareknowak8712]

"...so suited for Human life" ???? In all of the Cosmos, we live freely on only 1/4 of the surface of one, small Earth, afaik.

[@DubzCo]

4:08 no no no no no lol we will never come to a final fundamental piece of matter that is the ‘smallest’ As above so below as the term goes and apparently he universe is infinite so why wouldn’t that work the other way round?

[@DubzCo]

In fact I’m sure it was Brian Greene that said this in a talk he was actually quoting someone else’s words though

[@rl7012]

The universe is not infinite in time, and most likely not infinite in space either.

[@willyh.r.1216]

Don't believe your thoughts, Come back to the right present moment, Remember love.

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

*Don't believe your thoughts,* _Ever?_ I believe there are thoughts. Could that be wrong? If so _how?_ *Come back to the right present moment,* - How do you determine what's right without some kind of thought being involved? *Remember love.* - But there's more to life than _love_ isn't there?

[@333STONE]

@@paulbrocklehurst2346 Love is all there is. We are the uniforms in which the in and out interface. Beth=house . Thus Bethlehem House of Bread, although there is no (of) in hebrew. Bread is only accomplished through the right process and faith that it will rise. Which equates to the Bread being Life true life, or SPIRIT. From No Thing, Everything is

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

@@333STONE *Love is all there is.* > Why do you believe that? *We are the uniforms in which the in and out interface.* > How did you determine this? *Beth=house . Thus Bethlehem House of Bread, although there is no (of) in hebrew. Bread is only accomplished through the right process and faith that it will rise. Which equates to the Bread being Life true life, or SPIRIT.* > How does the meaning of a word like 'Bethlehem' demonstrate that love is all there is? *From No Thing,* > No thing isn't _anything._ *Everything is* > Is _what_ & how do you _know_ that? Can it be independently tested to be a fact? If so _how_ exactly?

[@333STONE]

@@paulbrocklehurst2346 Through life experience and good process, combined with Faith

[@paulbrocklehurst2346]

@@333STONEExperiences can be misleading & I can't help but notice that you can't describe a good process with testable results. As for faith, faith is the excuse people give for believing things when they can't supply a good reason for doing so.

[@mohamedbouhafs4603]

If it's theory it's never final.....

[@savageandthebeasts8388]

I often hear you ask, "why is universe so suited for life"? Which is weird because life would die in 99.999999999999% of the solar system. We are primates clinging to a small rock.

[@francesco5581]

and yet an universe without life would be nothing

[@francesco5581]

@Pisstake indeed ... or at least irrelevant compared to a frog.

[@cps_Zen_Run]

@Pisstake I am not sure there can be a “nothing. “. But that’s another discussion.

[@savageandthebeasts8388]

Technically, there is nothing here. The total energy us zero (negative gravitational energy equals the positive gravitational energy). We're not here man.

[@RoyBurnell-o6n]

Martinez Frank Lee Carol Taylor David

[@satoriwabisabi]

9:39 ...drops mic.

[@Psalm1101]

No

[@islandbuoy4]

Yes Frank Wilczek we know how you are reintroducing the contentious ETHER back into theoretical physics [and you won a Nobel prize for your efforts] ... we also know the following sir ... please pay attention you might have overlooked the obvious? *ACHIRAL = Quantum Fields that produce the ONE PERFECT PARTICLE = perfect symmetry* but we know that ALL LIFE IS CHIRAL we also know that *CHIRAL = BROKEN symmetry* *Yes it is the same story in the bible .. a state of perfection is broken in the garden of eden* *same ole story folks ... new storytellers .. new temple priests ... the PhD*

[@arsalanadil14912]

Hope that string theory might be the TOE

[@ssoffshore5111]

Way too many assumptions with ST, but who knows...

[@mehdibaghbadran3182]

everything in spaces and universes, are coming as a theory, and the best theory, should be accepted, until we create, better theory which gives you scenes, even the unbelievers, can accept, that, or cannot rejected.

[@MrPlaiedes]

This intro... Me: WE'RE COMIN TO AMERICA!

[@CharlesMatheny]

No.

[@Anju28959]

. 🌿 FINAL THEORY GOD IS DREAMING THE UNIVERSE .

[@superjaykramer]

A single particle is NOT logically possible!!....

[@rafiqbrookins4931]

He has “science” running scared singlehandedly😍🥰🌅

[@philippemartin6081]

You got it.pale philippe Martin 😎😎😎😎😎

[@neffetSnnamremmiZ]

A scientific theory? No! I am always bigger! 😎

[@DerMaikNichJa]

Final theory, that is a theory or model that explains everything? That's a description of reality, isn't it?

[@loren-emmerich]

there must be live somewhere else, let's find it

[@stephenwatts2649]

A Theory of Everything is a theory that explains, well, everything: every force, every particle, every bit of matter and energy in the universe. The problem with theories of everything is that they have to reconcile so many different theories into one. Individually, we have a good idea of how matter works and what it is made from. This is called the Standard Model of particle physics. We also have the theory of gravity which explains the universe as a geometric structure that curves to create gravitational effects. These two ideas are largely incompatible. It is possible that if Albert Einstein hadn’t been in the picture, if he had been content to worry about problems like Brownian motion and the photoelectric effect, we might have ended up with a very different theory of gravity, perhaps one that is more inline with other particle theories. We’ll never know. The problem now is that there is only one serious contender for a theory of everything: string theory. String theory isn’t one theory either. It is a collection of related theories, any of which could be true or none of them. This article isn’t about string theory, but about the lack of any paradigmatically different approach to a theory of everything. While there are many, many theories of quantum gravity that attempt to reconcile Einstein’s theory with the Standard Model, few are as ambitious as string theory to attempt to integrate all forms of particles into one: strings, which create the different particles by vibrating in multidimensional spaces. It is no wonder that so many thousands of papers have been written about it. Isaac Newton wanted a theory of everything and so spent literally decades of his life trying to understand what stuff was made from. Unfortunately, he lived at a time when chemistry didn’t even exist and wasted his time on alchemy, a mystical art that had as much to do with science as astrology. Lucky for us that we are smarter than that. Or are we? Perhaps endeavors like string theory are little more than a modern form of alchemy, couched in the language and practices of science but ultimately more about ourselves and the narratives we tell about the world as about reality. More hardheaded types might say that we don’t need a theory of everything. Perhaps there is no such thing. Science is often messy and ugly. Look at the three-body problem of Newtonian mechanics - another problem Newton wasted a lot of time on. It is unsolvable in any closed form and admits chaotic solutions. How could that be? How ugly. But beauty and ugliness are not as important as truth in science. The three body problem is a good example for it shows our hubris in that we look for order and call it beauty when a universe as vast and complex as ours also admits chaos, which has its own beauty. While string theory has many things going for it mathematically that make it more compelling than other ideas, I wonder that it perpetuates a 20th century viewpoint of physical processes that needs to be overturned. Consider that it posits an object, a string, which moves in a space, e.g., Calabi-Yau microspacetime. It also accepts quantum field theory as is without modification as providing the statistical background of the theory. Thus, it perpetuates the 20th century viewpoint of modern physics: quantum fields, representing particles, moving in spacetime manifolds. It modifies the view considerably with strings and multidimensional spaces, but it hardly changes the paradigm. Perhaps this, not its lack of predictions or its complexity, is its greatest shortcoming. 19th century physics suffered its own flaws, many of which have been forgotten. It focused largely on bodies in Newtonian fashion rather than fields. It failed to understand the power of general covariance and equated coordinate systems with reality. It traded in absolutes in time and space. Are we doing better? A string’s existence is a type of absolute reality, no matter how dynamical it is. Could it be that the 21st century might eliminate absolutes? To allow for a reality that can be dynamically shaped in every possible way? I don’t know what that theory looks like, but I know it will be completely general. It will not posit a thing exists in the world to create reality; rather, it will only posit that a world exists and thereby makes itself real. It will have no absolutes: no strings, no quantum field theory, nothing but, perhaps, shape, infinitely malleable, and underlying that shape, perhaps nothing, i.e. no thing. For to posit a theory of every thing requires that one not start with a thing, or you arrive at infinite recursion. What, if not a thing, underlies all things? When contemplating what is not a thing and yet is important to physical law, I think of energy. Energy can be like a thing as when it becomes mass. Or it can be expressed as frequency of light, movement, heat, or potential for something to happen. Fundamentally, energy is just one of many similar quantities such as momentum, but it is not a thing. I am not necessarily saying “all is energy” but rather all is akin to movement, like energy, but there is no thing moved because movement underlies all things. This could be like a pregeometry such as an algebra as David Bohm proposed or some other way of representing that which underlies geometry. What is clear to me is that whether string theory pans out or not, we will have no theory of everything until we have a theory that has no things in it, including strings. Meschini; et al. (August 2006). “Geometry, pregeometry and beyond”. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 36 (3): 435-464. arXiv:gr-qc/0411053. 571 19 571 19 Get an email whenever Tim Andersen, Ph.D. publishes.

[@rh001YT]

Of what use will be the final theory of everything? Also, these CtT episodes are always Western-centric. I wonder how East Asian physicists pursue this matter. For all we know secret programs in Japan, S. Korea or China are a bit or a lot ahead of the West on this matter.