Is Everything Derived from a Single Equation?

[w4k4b4lool4]

Hi All,

To zoom in, or to zoom out .. that is the question:

http://htwins.net/scale2/

Isn't it amazing ..
that we're arrogant enough to claim that it all probably comes from a single equation?
Wow!

Wakabaloola :)

 

[HallsofIvy]

Hi All,

To zoom in, or to zoom out .. that is the question:

http://htwins.net/scale2/

Isn't it amazing,
that we're arrogant enough to claim that it all comes from a single equation?
Wow!

Wakabaloola :)

I've never heard anyone claim that. Where did you?

 

[w4k4b4lool4]

Hi HallsofIvy!
Notice the edit, and in particular that I included the word `probably'!
Wakabaloola

 

[Danger]

Isn't it amazing ..
that we're arrogant enough to claim that it all probably comes from a single equation?

I have no idea what that's supposed to mean, unless you're referring to a religious version of creation. If the reference is to the existence of extraterrestrial life, it's statistically almost impossible for it to not be there.

 

[w4k4b4lool4]

here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=622391
Wakabaloola

 

[Danger]

Oh, okay... that stuff is way beyond my education level.
I will say, however, that if it doesn't explain things like dark energy, dark matter and the Higgs field, and explain things that we haven't even dreamed of yet, it isn't valid.

 

[Drakkith]

That equation is tremendously complex. It is not simply "one equation". (It is, but it's far more involved than F=MA or something similar) It has multiple steps involving math that we can't even solve for an exact solution except in a few very specific cases. However, I do understand most what you are saying. I don't find it arrogant at all. I find it convenient that we can place the basic interactions of matter at the quantum level into one equation. I'm not sure what you mean when you say everything "comes from a single equation" though. It merely describes the wavefunction of a particle.

 

[AnTiFreeze3]

The confusion lies within the fact that there was no claim that the equation could describe the entire universe, and every little thing within it; he was merely showing how we can put together the combined achievements of various scientists into one equation, and how (to Neil Turok) that shows the intrinsic beauty and value of theoretical physics.

I believe that the OP got caught up in what some of us might call "emotions." I haven't tried them out quite yet, but I will make the assumption that, after viewing that lovely spectacle (which I have seen before) he had a revelation that it is just all too beautiful and amazing to have a mere line of numbers and Greek symbols claim to be able to describe it all. (Which is what that equation cannot do, so the OP is in the clear for now).

 

[genericusrnme]

Why is it arrogant to think that the very basic elements of the universe are describable?

 

[Danger]

What on Earth is "" supposed to represent? It looks like a visually impaired owl.

 

[Andre]

What on Earth is "" supposed to represent? It looks like a visually impaired owl.

? http://forums.warriorcats.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&f=855107&m=71310785622

 

[Drakkith]

What on Earth is "" supposed to represent? It looks like a visually impaired owl.

A face with one eye way open or eyebrow raised up.