A Brief History of Time question

In summary: But for now, they remain two fundamental partial theories that help us understand different aspects of the universe. In summary, the general theory of relativity describes gravity and large-scale structures, while quantum mechanics deals with small-scale phenomena, and both are necessary for a complete understanding of the universe.
  • #1
mcelsner
2
0
"Today scientists describe the universe in terms of two basic partial theories - the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics... The general theory of relativity describes the force of gravity and the large-scale structure of the universe, that is, the structure on scales from only a few miles to as large as a million million million million (1 with twenty-four zeros after it) miles, the size of the observable universe. Quantum mechanics, on the other hands, deals with phenomena on extremely small scales, such as a millionth of a millionth of an inch. Unfortunately, however, these two theories are known to be inconsistent with each other - they cannot both be correct."

Is it possible that both theories are correct because the Theory of Relativity must be understood as dealing specifically with matter/mass/gravity; while the Theory of Quantum Mechanics should be recognized as being a Truth regarding primordial, atomic consciousness.

One must realize the inherent truth, that all matter has consciousness. This is realized and proved by the realization that atomically protons, electons and neutrons are vibrating/moving/orbiting around a nucleus. (This fundamental fact is amazing when it is considered that the microcosmos [atom] is the same in form and function as the macrocosmos [universe] and the Cosmos of Pure Universes, is so vast that it cannot even be imagined.) Just as it is impossible to know how many atoms compose a human being, it is impossible to know or understand how many Universes there are in existence in the Cosmos. But each, atom, molecule, is inherent evolving consciousness. On the atomic level, the force which creates motion within the atom, "IS" the consciousness I refer to. It is one and the same. Just as consciousness is apparent in the animal/human world by the facility of locomotion and movement, these unevolved atoms possesses (or are possessed by) the most Primordial Consciousness, which generates movement within. Just as the orbits of the Macrocosmos revolve around the Sun, with intelligence, the orbits of the microcosmos do the same thing.

These truths have been revealed to man through the great Hindu sages, Upanishads, and Vedas. These truths are being revealed to man to finally reconcile two wonderful realities. The realities of science, in it's desire for truth based upon experience, reason, logic, and scientific and methodological studies; and the reality of God, that primordial consciousness which gives everything that is its inherent movement, being, growth, and evolution.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
mcelsner said:
Is it possible that both theories are correct

No, it isn't. Any two statements that contradict each other, cannot both be true.

because the Theory of Relativity must be understood as dealing specifically with matter/mass/gravity; while the Theory of Quantum Mechanics should be recognized as being a Truth regarding primordial, atomic consciousness.

Let's get this straight right now: No one has ever demonstrated any connection between Quantum Mechanics and consciousness, even in principle. That is pure quackery that, regrettably, is propagated via pop science books. It really has got to stop.

The rest of your post is pure religious speculation, which we do not host here at Physics Forums.

Please see the following notice:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=15844

Thank you,
 
  • #3
In this sense, both the general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics can be seen as correct, as they are simply different ways of understanding and describing the same underlying reality - the inherent consciousness and movement of all matter in the universe. As our understanding of the universe continues to evolve, it is possible that we will find a way to reconcile these two theories and see them as complementary rather than contradictory.
 

Related to A Brief History of Time question

1. What is "A Brief History of Time" about?

"A Brief History of Time" is a popular science book written by Stephen Hawking, a renowned theoretical physicist. It explores various topics in cosmology, such as the Big Bang theory, black holes, and the concept of time, and presents them in a way that is accessible to non-scientific readers.

2. Is "A Brief History of Time" difficult to understand?

The book covers complex scientific concepts, but Hawking uses simple language and analogies to explain them. Some readers may find certain parts challenging, but overall, the book is written for a general audience and does not require a background in science to understand.

3. How accurate is "A Brief History of Time"?

The book is based on scientific theories and research accepted by the scientific community at the time of its publication in 1988. However, some of the information may have been updated or revised since then as scientific knowledge and technology continue to advance.

4. What makes "A Brief History of Time" a significant book?

"A Brief History of Time" is significant because it presents complex scientific concepts in a way that is accessible to non-scientists. It helped to popularize and increase public interest in cosmology and the study of the universe. It also showcases Hawking's unique perspective and contributions to the field of theoretical physics.

5. Can anyone read and understand "A Brief History of Time"?

While the book is written for a general audience, some parts may be challenging for readers without a background in science. However, with some effort and possibly some additional research, anyone can gain a basic understanding of the concepts presented in the book.

Similar threads

Replies
190
Views
10K
  • New Member Introductions
Replies
2
Views
83
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
69
Views
5K
Replies
39
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
135
Views
9K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
25
Views
1K
Back
Top