• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

TOE Cracked

Imaginative

Scholar
I
Joined
Feb 1, 2006
Messages
70
Headline: Theory of Everything cracked by Scientists

Reaction: Yeh, so what!

Headline: Evidence for Life after Death found

Reaction: Rejoicing in the streets.

OK, a bit presumptuous, but I think you get my point. The thing about the second headline would be the profound effect it would have on people compared to the first.

Edit:
What would be your reaction if the first headline were true.
 
Last edited:
You're missing something, so I added it:

Headline: Evidence for Life after Death found

Reaction: Scientists trip over themselves to replicate the evidence. When done, original scientist receives Nobel Prize. Scientists continue to question everything with rigor and scrutiny.

If the first were true (TOE), what would I do? Probably read up on the good laymen's summaries on it, talk about it on the forum, raise a toast to the one(s) who cracked it, think "Wow, cool" to myself, and still go to work the next day.

Which is pretty much what I'd do if the second happened.
 
I think the 'rejoicing in the streets' thing is a little wishful. I really believe that most people live with a secret hope that their every move, motive, and dream ISN'T being scrutinized. After all, the idea of life after death is usually accompanied by the idea of reward and punishment - and how many people would be rejoicing to find out their faith was in the WRONG religion, and that they were all doomed to hell?
 
Headline 1: After Painstaking Research, Full AIDS Vaccine Found!

Reaction: Yawns

Headline 2: ALL OF YOUR WILDEST FANTASIES TO COME TRUE!

Reaction: Jubilation

...

I think it would be more a case of how the stories were approached than the actual headline. For example, if the life-after-death thing was a real headline, the rest of the story (if it was truly scientific evidence) might be discussing the details of finding the clue and the last paragraph would have some speculation on the consequences. Conversely, they could at least try to make a TOE story exciting. Moreover, if these aren't front-page articles, I'd bet that many people wouldn't even read them, meaning that the overall reaction to your life-after-death headline might just as well be: 'ho-hum'

Ultimately, while popular support for science is critical in terms of funding, no single story will have that big of an impact. Either scientists find a TOE, which turns out to be effective, or not. Either something remarkable happens and evidence for life-after-death is found, or more likely, not.

Overall, the conclusion I draw from the OP is that you think religious people are more likely to riot. ;)
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't a TOE include life-after-death anyway? It would tell you how many angels could dance on the head of a pin for God's sake.
 
or automatically preclude... we'll have to see what form it takes. ;)
 
KingMerv00 said:
Wouldn't a TOE include life-after-death anyway? It would tell you how many angels could dance on the head of a pin for God's sake.
Click to expand...

Not really. The common definition of "theory of everything" merely refers to a physical theory which describes all of the fundamental forces between all the fundamental kinds of matter. Most people who believe in souls do not consider it to be made up of "matter." Furthermore, even if you consider that sort of stuff to be made of matter, a theory of everything would not be able to predict the behavior of souls unless we could actually find one of them and figure out what it's made of. And of course, we probably wouldn't be able to find one.

A theory of everything is only about everything in an abstract sense.
 
Thanks for your replies so far.

I suppose to my mind I am amazed at the vast amount of money being put into unlocking the secrets of the universe compared to finding a cure for Cancer or Aids, only guessing in my comparrison here.

What I'm getting at is, if your pumping money into a cure for cancer, you have a clearly defined goal with a final outcome, if successful, that will benefit everyone.

I don't think the same can be said for finding the TOE.
 
And, clearly, you are mistaken.

Funding for researching a TOE is miniscule compared to funding for cancer and AIDS research. Those researching TOE, after all, are largely working math and thinking, while those doing medical research have all those expensive gizmos and gadgets to purchase.

Comparably, the rewards would match the funding levels - Since a TOE would act as a foundation for further research, and would inevitably lead to advancements in every sort of technology and bioengineering, the long-term benefits of a TOE would far outweigh those of biomedical research; however, those long-term benifits would only come after a comparable expenditure of further funds, after the discovery of the TOE.

But what the heck does that last post have to do with discovery of the afterlife? You didn't mention 'cure for AIDS' or 'cure for cancer' in your OP - Strawman, much?
 
zaayrdragon said:
And, clearly, you are mistaken.
Click to expand...

Thank you, I stand corrected.

zaayrdragon said:
Funding for researching a TOE is miniscule compared to funding for cancer and AIDS research. Those researching TOE, after all, are largely working math and thinking, while those doing medical research have all those expensive gizmos and gadgets to purchase.
Click to expand...

Again, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the cost of building particle accelerators run into the billions of dollars bracket and aren't these machines built to substantiate Physics and Maths research theories?

zaayrdragon said:
Comparably, the rewards would match the funding levels - Since a TOE would act as a foundation for further research, and would inevitably lead to advancements in every sort of technology and bioengineering, the long-term benefits of a TOE would far outweigh those of biomedical research; however, those long-term benifits would only come after a comparable expenditure of further funds, after the discovery of the TOE.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here but the so called advances would come about as a by product, not as something that was envisioned from the start.

zaayrdragon said:
But what the heck does that last post have to do with discovery of the afterlife? You didn't mention 'cure for AIDS' or 'cure for cancer' in your OP - Strawman, much?
Click to expand...

The topic of the OP was to grab people's attention and to ilicit a response to my question, which I'm still interested in hearing if anyone else wants to continue. I appologise for going off on a slight tangent, still relatively new here. I also, wanted to respond to your points.
 
Eh, I don't know much about particle accelerators - except you only build a few of them, they don't take much funding to operate, and over the course of the lifetime of a particle accelerator, you spend less than you do in medical research (according to some vague half-remembered article I read once sometime in the past... ) :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom