The Theory of Everything?

Question

Using Stephen Hawking's definition of the Theory of Everything, do you think scientists will ever be able to form satisfactory theory of everything?

Do we already know all we are capable of knowing about the Universe, its creation etc? Is the theory of everything out of our reach?

Or are scientists on the cusp of an explanation and one day we will have the answer?

Thank you for your thoughts.

Answer 1

String Theory is actually very close to what we'd call a 'theory of everything,' unifying relativity and quantum theory and the four fundamental forces. However, it's still very controversial.



Edit:

Wow, humpy, of course you think it was God, because you clearly have absolutely no idea about any of the principles behind the Big Bang.

Answer 2

A Theroy of Everything does not mean a magic formulae that will answer al questions and be abble to predict the future.

You cannot, for instance, make it into a computer program that will tell you who you will marry and how many kids you will have.



What it can do is explain all the Forces in the Universe with a single equation. There are only 4 known forces that explain all the phenomena we can see: Gravity, Electromagnetic, "Strong Force" and "Weak Force".



Strong and weak forces act inside atom nuclei. they determine, for example, which nuclei will be stable and which will be radioactive.



Electromagnetic forces are responsible for magnetic fields, electricity and all chemical interactions. They also explain how molecules interact with light, which substances will have which colour, etc.



Gravity holds us to the ground, keeps the Moon going aroung the Earth, the Earth going around the Sun and keeps galaxies together. It also is important in black holes and other sutff.



Here is the challenge:

Currently we have 2 theories

1) Quantum mechanics - deals with really small stuff such as atoms, molecules and subatomic particles and works quite well there: it can explain nuclear and chemical reactions

2) General Relativity - deals with time and gravity, but only on large scales (planets, stars, galaxies and, to some extent, black holes).



We do not have a theory that can be used for both at the same time. Everything seems to point to the Big Bang theory being, in general, correct: the universe started small and got very large. During some period in its history it went through a stage that can only be looked into by a model that can explain both "small" and "large" scales. Until we got one we will never know what happened at that time.

Answer 3

Hello,



(ANS) First of all I have to say I find this topic extremely interesting on an intellectual philosophical level. But how useful it really is to most ordinary people with ordinary lives I think is debatable?



** No.2 My further interest in this subject is a little biased as my cousin is a Professor of Physics & Mathematics & a University Lecturer in this precise field of study. My cousin is Dr.Ratoff & he will be conducting experiments in the future using the Large Hadron collider when it opens in the near future. (The exact same research field as Dr. Hawkins).



No.3 Humans are innately curious about the world around them, and we will always want to try and make sense of how that world fits together or is constructed.



No.4 So far the BIG brake through theory, "the so called theory of everything" is tantalizingly close yet evades us. This is because we know how gravity works on the very large scale of the universe & also we know how particles work on a very small scale but we have not yet been able to fit the two things together. i.e. Gravity on the tiny sub atomic scale & Quantum theory to the large scale.



M - theory is the current cutting edge theory, which is a variation of string theory or super string theory. Which conceives of multiple dimensions.



Kind Regards Ivan.

Answer 4

Blimey ! Humpys got the hump...... Well as you don't give a 'crap' I will give you a crap answer. Theory is exactly that. It's 50% taking known ideologies and 50% theorizing. If it makes any sense at all, we only know as much as we think we know. Supposition rules and as we are a curious species we take what we know, what we think we know and this equals our 'theory.' As technology advances, I hope we can get more information as it's a very interesting question.



I say this with all due respect, I would much rather put my faith in science than religion.



On a side note, I sincerely believe there are people who know a lot more about our universe that is not in the public domain.



Edit...... This is the first time on this site, someones answer has given me the right hump. So just because someone has asked a question and not included anything that you 'believe' in, that means they don't give a 'crap?' I just can't get over your audacity. Using your logic, next time I ask a question on YA, let's say for example, "Do you prefer McDonalds or Burger King?" Should I add a footnote? And so as not to offend any religious persons.... "What do you think God prefers?"

BLIMEY !

Answer 5

In the introduction of one of his books, Stephen Hawking writes:

"I was once lecturing about the universe when a lady stood up and said:

- This is wrong! The earth rests on a big frog!

Asking then what the frog was resting on, she said:

- On an endless column of frogs, of course!"



Then Hawking writes about the big bang, black holes, big crunch, etc. At the very end of the book, he concludes:



"Of course, I can't prove anything of this any more than the lady with the frog."



That was a great thought from a great, yet modest man! Likewise, the pursuit of the Theory of Everything, following the path of the Newtonian thought of a predictable universe, is something we can't answer now. What do I wish? The answer must, of course, be: yes!

Answer 6

Personally, I think Hawking is mis-naming his theory. The fact is that on a conceptual basis, life is nothing more than opportunistic biochemical reactions occurring on many different scales simultaneously. Ergo, it's all the same. It's just a matter of scale. I believe that there will never be a "theory of everything" because X is not Y, therefore the theory can't include "everything" because everything is not, everything else.



Number 9 on the Periodic Table could be used as an analogy for our solar system. 9 planets, 9 electrons.

Answer 7

The Theory of Everything is a long way out of reach. We have only sent a few probes out into space. We are just barely starting to scratch the surface of exploring Mars. Our telescopes can only see so far in the universe. Next year will mark the 40th anniversary of the Moon landings. 65 years before that we just discovered flight. The human race is an infant in the crib. The Moon landing, the probes, the telescope is just our first attempts to see what is beyond our crib. Our return to the Moon in 2020 followed by attempting to establish a base in 2024 will be our first baby step out of the crib. There is so much that awaits us out there, we can't even begin to comprehend. That is the adventure that awaits us.

Answer 8

In theory I think that, at the centre of a black-hole is a rather unhappy fish complaining about the weather..



Nice to think that one day Mankind may know everything but it will be a long way off to change from theory to known fact.



if you take mankind out of the theory and leave only matter dust,rocks,plasma etc then yep i reckon mankind could crack that one fairly quickly say a 1000years perhaps (In theory a black-hole is X now prove it !!), but as for our part in the grand scale of things that I reckon that could be an endless theory

Answer 9

We don't even know that a theory of everything can even exist. It's just speculation based on the fact that's we've been able to unite 3 of the forces so far, so why not get the fourth one? There's no reason this has to be possible.

Answer 10

Well, my theory is that God created everything



however, your question doesn't exactly give a crap about this and so i shall tell you about varying theories. one of which is the big bang; i don't think that scientists will ever be able to define as to what happened on that fateful day as it was such a tremendous amount of energy it managed to create a universe, galaxies, solar systems, stars, planets, moons, and most importantly, life.



i suppose the main question would be how this is even possible

scientists believe it was two balls of gases that collided together and then BOOM. magical universe

however, how were these gases even created? (again, i think it was God) but an even bigger question is what gases could even resmble this. if science teaches us anything it's that when one particle is mixed with another, it still keeps the same amount of particles that were origionally used.

EG.. one oxygen particle mixed with 2 hydrogen particles = H2O. this means that it still contains the same amount of origional particles.

so what kind of gases colliding together would equal universe?



just to finish off, i still think it was God ;)

Answer 11

I think I've already got it................



y = 2X where x = half of everything