View Single Post
Old 08-22-2011, 09:09 PM   #220
cowmoo32
drunken science
 
cowmoo32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 5,532
My Ride: Trek 1.5
Quote:
Originally Posted by i_ween View Post
I agree, up to a point. If the math ends up working as a TOE, there may be questions we won't be able to answer. However, if the math all works out, will we really *need* to answer those questions?
Without a doubt. A TOE must explain everything, whether or not that implies that it's time-invariant is up for debate. Here's my problem though: Either there is a paradigm shift or we'll never know the truth because let's say we arrive on a theory that does explain everything. It blends the accuracy and reliability of QM and the beauty of GR. Now, forget whether this theory says the universe came from a singularity or has always "been", and functions on the inflation-->crunch idea. Either way you look at it, the requisite energy had to come from somewhere/somewhen. And no matter how many levels you can explain, "Our universe is cyclical, but it originated from two higher dimensional membranes colliding. Those branes are the result of the uncurling of what was the 12th dimension" (one flavor of string/M-theory calls for 11 dimensions). That's all good and well, but what caused the 12th dimension to uncurl in the first place? Where did it get the energy to create the branes? IMO either we find a non-causal perspective of the universe/multi-verse/whatever, which rails against every observation we make in our daily lives (although so does QM), or we'll never really know.
__________________

flickher

What's this about a brownie in motion?
cowmoo32 is online now   Reply With Quote