TOE incomplete without God

Mr. Robin Parsons

Any ToE is a description of the physical matter and rules that that follows, the energy is simply a part of that, hence there can be no conclusive evidence of God in the Physical matter alone, (even though, it is clearly a part of the totality of evidence) you would need to include all of the rest of the "Un-knowable", How do you do that?

MythioS

God=Time

[:))]

MythioS [6)]

Entheos

I voted "yes" because I believe a theory of everything requires God, but I do not believe that Super String Theory requires God, however, it may but until it is proven/disproven we will not know.


Even if you are not a spiritual/religious person I think you have to consider that God exists in the context of a theory of everything, if nothing else consider yourself God. For what is God, but a creator? Do humans not create?

As PhoenixThoth's quote says: "love the world as yourself for, in truth, It Is."

Think of yourself as a piece of God, a single cell in the mind of God. Together we form the whole, but individually we are insignificant.

Erck

God the "whole"... is greater than the sum of it's parts "the universe."

JesseBonin

sentience? sembiance? some giant sitting on a cloud looking down on us and making a list?

entheos i think is closest to the truth
"i am the god i am" part of the original text of the first comandment best guess translation..
GoD may not be more than the premiss of something larger than ourselves, maybe our existence is a neccessary ingredient to gods makeup.

maybe god is some adolecet who just lit a firecraker and we are the ultra-microscopic residents of the small explosion cought in the small rift in time/space created by the divergence of light..

Erck

I certainly agree with this statement.

God is always being all it can be.

sol2

A lot of issues have been placed on this alter:)

Of course, a trail has been blazed in GR.

What value would dimension be, if we did not give it some consideration?

JesseBonin

there are 2 sides to every coin (action and reaction so on and so forth) so if there is a "god" is there not also an "anti-god"

humans by nature have a tendancy to put either too much or too little of themselves into any equation, but science, if it has shown us nothing, has shown us that everything exists in balance with itself.

as individuals we are almost insignificant to the whole, but as a race we are profundly affective (not a misuse, i mean affective not effective ) we are in essence the root of all we know and understand about GOD and the universe. OUR sembiant intelligence is far greater than our individual understanding.

that being said, it seems to me our "sembiant intelligence" could use a few lessons in things like "self preservation" and "conservation" """sorry, had to add that for some unknown reason"""

sol2

In a evolutionary context, it appeases the Gods?

Erck

Only if god is relative and not absolute.

sol2

A lot of people divest themselves of probabilibistic determinations. Yet we find, orbiting imaginations, have this same brilliance, to manifest constructive things

Erck

sol2... I'm sensing some substance there... any chance you could restate that?

Jimbroni

Regardless of your spiritual beliefs or disbeliefs. God, Buddha, Christna, Satan, Ra, whatever all these have to be included in your definition of "everything" or else your definition is incomplete or perhaps theory of everything is really not what your after.
When you say everything, to me that means everything including all of our thoughts, dreams, beliefs, disbeliefs,math, science, well everything.
I personally like Grand Unification Theory as better more defined name.

JesseBonin

ahhh.. now we find the point at which religon and physics converge 8)

we call God "god" physics calls god "photon"

the priciple problem with relativity is the existance of something we cannot measure "light" more specifically "photon"
all things we deem "real" have motion, therefor energy and mass, perhaps photon does not move at all, and is absolute stationary, therefor is must transfer "energy" by some other means (dark energy) we percive light (and by default everything that exists) by passing through this photonic energy. so if we make the next "leap of faith" is not photon the same god, or at least the essence of god??

sol2

Certainly there is Uncertainty when it comes to position and momentum, but in the instance of orbital patterns, one can get around this?

So the question then is place out there about uncertainty, and what can be determined and what can't be?

I would say, that if such an action is contemplated, that it definitely has consequences. I just have to prove it?

Regardless of the nesessicity of having to prove it, life still goes on:)

Does this sound logical?

Erck

But is it impossible to include a definition of god in a TOE?

sol2

Why not a belief, that such choices made, can hold relevances to the gravity of all situations. That some, operate independantly, having realized that such choices have consequences?:) Maybe God, can do that? But us mere mortals, are locked into the entanglement issue?:)