Quantum Gravity and String Theory


The Mythos of a Theory of Everything

Authors: Armin Nikkhah Shirazi

A fundamental assumption embedded in our current worldview is that there exists an as yet undiscovered `theory of everything', a fifinal unified framework according to which all interactions in nature are but different manifestations of the same underlying thing. This paper argues that this assumption is wrong because our current distinct fundamental theories of nature already have mutually exclusive domains of validity, though under our current worldview this is far from obvious. As a concrete example, it is shown that if the concepts of mass in general relativity and quantum theory are distinct in a specific way, their domains become non-overlapping. The key to recognizing the boundaries of the domains of validity of our fundamental theories is an aspect of the frame of reference of an observer which has not yet been appreciated in mainstream physics. This aspect, called the dimensional frame of reference(DFR), depends on the number of length dimensions that constitute an observer frame. Edwin Abbott's Flatland is used as point of departure from which to provide a gentle introduction to the applications of this idea. Finally, a metatheory of nature is proposed to encompass the collection of theories of nature with mutually exclusive domains of validity.

Comments: 11 Pages. Final version of paper as it appeared on the fourth FQXi essay contest

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2012-08-16 05:26:03
[v2] 2012-10-26 19:43:33

Unique-IP document downloads: 146 times

Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus