Updated: Feb 3, 2021
NEW SCIENCE ON THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING
In the modern era of scientific innovations, science continues to expand as new theories and laws substitute older ones. Because of this, scientists, especially theoretical physicists, have been striving to create unifying concepts that can explain contrasting physical phenomena. Since the early twentieth century, various scientists have put forward an array of ideas in this regard.
The Theory of Everything
An original pioneer of such concepts was mathematician David Hilbert. He proposed that there could exist a common fundamental composition, accommodating for all the established principles of physics we currently know. The “theory of everything,” also championed by Stephen Hawking, refers to an ideology which could merge the classical and quantum realms; the macroscopic and microscopic realities of meta-physics.
Eric Weinstein’s Ideas
The quantum world of physics revolves around subatomic particles (protons, electrons, quarks etc.) which make up matter. In contrast, classical physics deals with the macroscopic bodies of nature. Eric Weinstein, who is an economist and a former physicist, has recently proposed his own revolutionary ideas regarding the unification of these two major domains. Weinstein is of the view that basic principles of general relativity can be extended to design modern equations, applying these novel mathematical solutions to the quantum world.
The “Observerse” and Geometric Unity
Eric Weinstein’s theory, also called the “Geometric Unity,” expands the scope of the space-time continuum. He proposes a multi-dimensional space that includes length, width, depth, time and several other dimensions. This has been termed as the “observerse,” and consists of 14 possible dimensions. The way Weinstein sees it, the quantum world could be comprised of innumerable subatomic particles. In the near future, such a vital discovery could help elaborate further on the intriguing phenomena of physics, such as dark energy and dark matter.
Controversy: What Does The Scientific Community Think?
As always, new scientific theories are, for good reason, subject to the tight scrutiny offered by fellow peers. In this regard, Weinstein’s theory of geometric unity has met mixed reviews. Several physicists have sought to find loopholes in his work, and similar work from the likes of Garrett Lisi, who proposed his own mathematical unification model called “an exceptionally simple theory of everything”.
Peers have claimed that, along with other major drawbacks, Weinstein has yet to produce the mathematical setting of his “groundbreaking” theory. Without any material evidence, his proposition of the existence of several undetected subatomic particles remains vague. Particle physicists have also pointed out that if there was any physical evidence of “Weinstein’s particles,” it would have already been uncovered by particle accelerators, which are currently being used at the most sophisticated laboratories around the world. Apart from these deemed flaws, some researchers have gone so far as to question Weinstein’s qualifications.
It is our belief that Weinstein’s peers are on the wrong side of history in this case. His ideas are profound and logical, providing a deeper explanation than much of the currently established science on this subject. It is true that there is a lack of imperial evidence, however, there is much more to science, especially meta-physics. The backlash and marginalisation of Weinstein mirrors that of the greats throughout scientific history, such as Amedeo Avogadro, Nicholas Copernicus and Gregor Mendel.
Watch this Big Think video, and decide for yourself!