Welcome, guest. You are not logged in.
Log in or join for free!
Forgot login details?

For free!
Get started!

Text page



by subhankar karmakar


The first time human being had started to think, the object of their observations were nature and natural phenomenon. The inherent curiosity in human being led our race to be the ruler of the planet. Knowledge starts with observations and it is observations which lead to the development of natural science and philosophy. We can show that basically philosophy, physics and psychology are the main cornerstone of the human race, and to be able to think as well as to express and modelling of physical phenomenon, languages and mathematics were developed too. In the primitive era of the human knowledge, what did human being do was to observe nature as much as it can do. Human brain is hardwired to distinguish patterns from the noise, actually that's why we can hear and identify different sounds from the each other. When one would think deeply, he would find that it is inevitable. The nature is full of patterns, it has been observed that a pattern formation somehow increases orderness in the system thus lowers it's entropy, it's a riddle that try to confuse me as it is against the second law of thermodynamics. Also, it has been observed that orderness in a system is dependent upon the scale of our observation, a system that is very chaotic in micro level may be of highly ordered in a larger scales.

< as human brain could achieve to develop a thinking mind during the course of evaluation, the mind started to think about the existence of human being and it's surrounding nature and thus the role of observation in human intelligence development is tremendous.

From antiquity to modern times, people have tried to develop a unified scientific theory that explains the laws governing the world around us. Some of the ancient Greeks believed the world was composed of four elements: earth, water, air, and fire. A prevailing question among ancient Greek philosophy was whether nature behaved as a continuum or as a collection of atoms suspended in total void. (Haubold and Mathai 1998).

A mechanical model of nature was developed during the Scientific Revolution. According to this model, forces acting at a distance moved objects along fixed trajectories described by Newtonian mechanics.

At the time of Maxwell, the notion of forces acting at a distance was replaced by the notion of field propagation through the ether. (Jammer 1995).

At the dawn of the 20th century, ether theory fell into disrepute when it predicted reference frame dependence of the velocity of light, a prediction contradicted by the Michelson-Morley experiment and Einstein's relativity theory. (Einstein 1920)

The subsequent development of quantum mechanics led to unresolved differences with relativity theory on the nature of determinism and causation. (Gribbin 1996, Callender and Huggett 2001).

After the development of relativity theory and quantum mechanics, several new types of particles and interactions were discovered, leading to the Standard Model of particle physics. (Cottingham and Greenwood 1999)

However, there still remain a number of Physical processes that are not explained by the Standard Model. Among other things,
the Standard Model does not provide a unification of gravitation with electromagnetism. Nor does it provide a method for quantizing gravity, i.e. predicting the masses of elementary particles. (Callender and Huggett 2001). Early efforts to unify electromagnetism and gravity were made by Einstein, Kaluza, and Klein.

More recently, several theories have emerged which attempt to expain the quantization of gravity. These methods include

(i) string and M theories (Kaku 1999, 2000, Greene 2000),
(ii) loop quantum gravity (Smolin 2000, Gambini and Pullin 2000),
(iii) twistor theory (Penrose and Rindler 1987ab),
(iv) noncommutative geometry (Connes 1994, Madore 1999),
(v) chaotic quantization (Beck 2002),
(vi) simplicial triangulation and lattice models (Smolin 2003, Hamber and Williams 1999),
(vii) resonance theory (Pinnow 2000),
(viii) causal set models (Smolin 2003, Markopoulou 2000), and
(ix) lump models (Requardt 2000).

This list includes only a representation of works written on these theories and is not meant to be complete. A Theory of Everything must also shed light on questions of broad importance to humanity. In particular, it must explain whether supernatural forces exist and if so how they interact with natural forces. I have no personal doubts as to what the answer to this question is, but I recognize the basic reality that many people believe in God whereas many other people do not. Our world is not wholly characterized by mechanical interactions but involves processes of thought, behavior, and social interactions. In general, a Theory of Everything must contain a broader concept of interaction that extends beyond the four fundamental interactions of electromagnetism, gravitation, and nuclear interactions. It should be adept at explaining abstract thought processes as well as physical interactions.

This page:

Help/FAQ | Terms | Imprint
Home People Pictures Videos Sites Blogs Chat