Theory of everything

[Someone here]

Will science ever figure out everything about the universe or is it impossible to encapsulate Infinity? 

[Jakuchu]

Science is an activity dependent on your senses. If we take away your senses, you can't do science. Which means science is not anything universal or existential. You would still exist, even without your senses. Experience would be gone but you would remain. Reflecting on that, that is science. Meditation is actual science 

Science is as effective as riding a unicycle when it comes to existential truths 

Every mystic in history: Go inward, go inward, go inward. The scientist goes further and further and further outward

Everything requires everything. This is not everything:

Edited December 25, 2021 by Jakuchu

[Someone here]

@Jakuchu The map is not the territory. But some maps are more  inclusive than others. Do you believe it's possible for scientists to make a map that explains everything (theory of everything)? 

[Jakuchu]

2 hours ago, Someone here said:

@JakuchuDo you believe it's possible for scientists to make a map that explains everything (theory of everything)? 

No, map/theory ≠ everything 

"Theory of Everything" already is a contradiction. It's like saying "Thought of Infinity" 

Someone who wants a theory of everything, wants awakening without the awakening part. I want to go to Mars without leaving my house, is that possible? 

 

Edited December 25, 2021 by Jakuchu

[At awe]

I’ve been thinking about this lately and it seems more and more that every model is a recipe for a mindfuck. It seems that “I’m” getting somewhere and at the same time I have a realization that it’s utterly useless. Beautiful ?

[Someone here]

@Jakuchu a theory is a theory and not everything. A theory about everything is not everything. I get this. But why can't we have a map /theory That comes close to describe the fundamental nature of reality?

[Jakuchu]

3 hours ago, Someone here said:

@Jakuchu a theory is a theory and not everything. A theory about everything is not everything. I get this. But why can't we have a map /theory That comes close to describe the fundamental nature of reality?

Because true understanding is born out of Being, not a map or a theory. A description without first hand experience is worthless

What are you gonna do with the description? Believe in it and become a religious nutcase? 

Oneness, Non-Duality, God, Infinity, Love, Nothingness, You, Existence... All these are descriptions. Without direct experience they will remain just words and ideas

 

Edited December 25, 2021 by Jakuchu

[Nahm]

 

47 minutes ago, Someone here said:

But why can't we have a map /theory That comes close to describe the fundamental nature of reality?

Because the seen & heard is hearsay. One has to see it for oneself so to speak. This could be a video about vanilla ice cream, but if you’ve never tasted it, it’s going to sound quite different. Which is perfection. 

[Tim R]

@Someone here

6 hours ago, Someone here said:

Will science ever figure out everything about the universe or is it impossible to encapsulate Infinity? 

And how are we going to encapsulate the encapsulation? In-finity is non-encapsulation (not two).

Science has a long way to go, the dream is infinite. Science has infinite potential, but within limits. 

 

Even if we included mysticism in science, it will make no difference, because the end, you will have to see it for yourself.

[Gesundheit2]

The word "everything" is itself the theory of everything. It encapsulates all of reality in one word.

[Nahm]

7 hours ago, Someone here said:

Will science ever figure out everything about the universe or is it impossible to encapsulate Infinity? 

In addition to seeing past the assumption of separate selves (& therein “science”), it would also need to be recognized that one is already holding a theory of infinity. That there even is such a thing. Like conceptualizing reading glasses vs noticing one is wearing them already. When the actuality of the glasses isn’t lining up with the held theory, the glasses remain unnoticed. The encapsulating is as illusory as the theory that there are theories (and videos as well). 
 

@Jakuchu ? 

[Jakuchu]

12 minutes ago, Nahm said:

 

12 minutes ago, Nahm said:

@Jakuchu ? 

?????

[Tyler Durden]

The closest that mainstream science has come to the Theory of everything are string theory and loop quantum gravity. Both of them are trying to combine general relativity and quantum mechanics. But you have to be aware that all of it is happening inside a God's dream so it will never be a complete Truth. 

[Batman]

No. Science is about making conclusions, distinctions and models. Consciousness is existence. Science is an activity of and within Consciousness. It will never take the shape or form of Consciousness, because Consciousness has no form or shape. It is impossible to represent Consciousness. Every thing that exists in some way, shape or form is a only distinct manifestation of Consciousness.

God 'expresses' it's infinitude and nothingness by being everything.

Edited December 25, 2021 by Batman

[snowyowl]

@Someone here "But why can't we have a map /theory That comes close to describe the fundamental nature of reality?"

'Fundamental nature of reality' is a belief too. I kinda believe in it to keep a grip on my sanity, but what if there's no fundamental, no ground to reality,  and it keeps going (in both directions, micro and macro) like an infinite fractal? In which case, all theories and maps are just relative to their level of magnification of the fractal. Useful of course, but not fundamental. The ultimate is the infinite relativity. 

Just a 'what if', not worth  losing sleep over. 

Edited December 26, 2021 by snowyowl

[Carl-Richard]

What does "figure out everything" even mean?

[Someone here]

7 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

What does "figure out everything" even mean?

Explain everything. 

[Jakuchu]

17 minutes ago, Someone here said:

Explain everything. 

Explain = One at a time, Everything = All at once 

[Javfly33]

13 hours ago, snowyowl said:

@Someone here "But why can't we have a map /theory That comes close to describe the fundamental nature of reality?"

'Fundamental nature of reality' is a belief too. I kinda believe in it to keep a grip on my sanity, but what if there's no fundamental, no ground to reality,  and it keeps going (in both directions, micro and macro) like an infinite fractal? In which case, all theories and maps are just relative to their level of magnification of the fractal. Useful of course, but not fundamental. The ultimate is the infinite relativity. 

Just a 'what if', not worth  losing sleep over. 

I agree ????

[Consept]

Will a writer ever create text that will let you know how it feels to eat a banana if you've never tried one?