Well allanius interestingly I wrote Dr. Penrose about a 'theory of everything' the other day,,,, No word back yet,,
But anyway, much rather than such thinking for a theory of everything exposing the ,'vanity of man's thinking',, I would much prefer to think that 'vanity of thinking' is somewhat the result, the shadow, of being made in God's image. In that it is man's nature to think that he can somehow 'know' the highest thoughts attainable, for indeed is it not in our nature to have a relationship with the highest Being (God)? from whom come the highest thoughts and virtues?
If you are interested here is a copy of the letter I sent Dr. Penrose. The letter may be too far fetched for him to even entertain, but none-the-less I remain confident in the general outline of ideas:
Dear Dr. Penrose,
I appreciated your appearance on the Unbelievable Radio program, as I respect your work very much and am very honored to even write you. You were very 'to the point' on Hawking's theory as well as admirably humble as to your own new theory. You are a true gentleman.
In regards to the topic of the 'theory of everything', which I gathered you feel we may never truly know, I wanted to show you a short video, which, though the video may seem to be a 'far fetched Christian idea' at first glance, actually fits the observational evidence fairly well for the space-time of General Relativity, as well as the evidence of how consciousness and Quantum Mechanics correlates. Correlates the evidence for General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics into, seemingly, a 'theory of everything': Please let me know what you think if it is not to much trouble
General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and The Shroud Of Turin - 10 minute video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5070355
The first part of the following paper goes into a few of the details of the 'physics' mentioned in the video;
Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis
http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.com/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
I would like to draw your attention to this statement:
The expansion of every 3D point in the universe, and the quantum wave collapse of the entire universe to each point of conscious observation in the universe, is obviously a very interesting congruence in science between the very large (relativity) and the very small (quantum mechanics). A congruence that Physicists, and Mathematicians, seem to be having a extremely difficult time 'unifying' into a 'theory of everything'.(Einstein, Penrose).
Yet, this unification, into a 'theory of everything', between what is in essence the 'infinite world of Quantum Mechanics' and the 'finite world of the space-time of General Relativity' seems to be directly related to what Jesus apparently joined together with His resurrection, i.e. related to the unification of infinite God with finite man:
,,, Perhaps, if you have the time Dr. Penrose, you could offer some suggestions that may improve the first part of the paper?
Sincerely
Philip Cbornagain77
October 1, 2010
October
10
Oct
1
01
2010
02:19 PM
2
02
19
PM
PDT
Hawking, like Einstein before him, is obsessed with finding the Simple Grand Theory That Explains Everything (SGTTEE). Hence his moth-like attraction to M-theory. He is not alone. Marx, Freud, Darwin—they all rose from the rabble through the unifying power of SGTTEEs. Theory has a peculiar characteristic, however. The very same force of resistance that empowers it to make grand unifying generalizations also seems to separate it from observation and the varieties of experience. This suggests an ironic subthesis of the “privileged planet.” Perhaps reality has been rigged to expose the vanity of human thinking.allanius
October 1, 2010
October
10
Oct
1
01
2010
01:42 PM
1
01
42
PM
PDT
It would be hard to find a more forceful rebuttal to Hawking's book:
'What is referred to as M-theory isn’t even a theory. It’s a collection of ideas, hopes, aspirations. It’s not even a theory and I think the book is a bit misleading in that respect. It gives you the impression that here is this new theory which is going to explain everything. It is nothing of the sort. It is not even a theory and certainly has no observational (evidence),,, I think the book suffers rather more strongly than many (other books). It’s not a uncommon thing in popular descriptions of science to latch onto some idea, particularly things to do with string theory, which have absolutely no support from observations.,,, They are very far from any kind of observational (testability). Yes, they (the ideas of M-theory) are hardly science." – Roger Penrose – former close colleague of Stephen Hawking – in critique of Hawking’s new book ‘The Grand Design’bornagain77