Tom Campbell - Big TOE

This guy is a physicist and a bit of a hippy. He's on YouTube explaining his 'Big TOE' (theory of everything) - I can't remember if I'm allowed to post youtube links here so I won't, but it's an easy one to find, just google the thread title adding 'youtube' to the search field if you're interested. There's quite a lot of it, but it's broken down into small pieces, and you can get the gist pretty quickly. I'd be interested to hear anybody's views on his views.

YouTube

18 minutes of non-sensical hippy wishy-washy claptrap. I gave up after "love and lower entropy are mirror images".

For some more "meta-physics raping science", look at this piece of crap:

YouTube

Payed about 18 euros for the DVD back then, cause I foolishly thought it was about quantum mechanics. Still pisses me off.

Originally posted by Great King Rat
[youtube]fT8LaMrn_MM[/youtube]

18 minutes of non-sensical hippy wishy-washy claptrap. I gave up after "love and lower entropy are mirror images".

Yeah that's a pretty dodgy equation alright. I do find the simulation hypothesis beguiling though, despite my scepticism.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Yeah that's a pretty dodgy equation alright. I do find the simulation hypothesis beguiling though, despite my scepticism.

It is one of those hypotheses that cannot be falsified so it is not real science at this point in time. For instance, if we were some kind of computer code, the pixels would have to be on the order of the Planck size, 10 ^-35 cm or better so it will a long time if ever that we could have direct evidence of such a situation.

This Big Toe does not also cover the idea there are possibly multiple dimensions, such as the current drive to measure the inverse square law at smaller and smaller distances apart for two masses. If a divergence of the inverse square law is found, it could be construed as evidence for a kind of rolled up extra dimension that would not normally interact with our dimensions. So far no dice but they continue to push the distance smaller and smaller, now about 100 microns, trying to sniff out 50 and 40 micron separation of masses. Anyway that's my 2 shekels worth.

Originally posted by sonhouse
It is one of those hypotheses that cannot be falsified so it is not real science at this point in time. For instance, if we were some kind of computer code, the pixels would have to be on the order of the Planck size, 10 ^-35 cm or better so it will a long time if ever that we could have direct evidence of such a situation.

This Big Toe does not also co ...[text shortened]... ns, trying to sniff out 50 and 40 micron separation of masses. Anyway that's my 2 shekels worth.

Always a valued 2 shekel's worth, although I daresay that if evidence for multiple dimensions were found it could be incorporated in what appears to be a pretty woolly sort of theory of everything such as this. I wouldn't dream of posting this particular theory in the science forum, because it's just not scientific, but it did put me in mind of a few er... spiritual paradigms which i've encountered over the years. Interesting, I thought.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
Always a valued 2 shekel's worth, although I daresay that if evidence for multiple dimensions were found it could be incorporated in what appears to be a pretty woolly sort of theory of everything such as this. I wouldn't dream of posting this particular theory in the science forum, because it's just not scientific, but it did put me in mind of a few er... spiritual paradigms which i've encountered over the years. Interesting, I thought.

Well, Campbell was clearly pushing his book. As far as spirituality goes, it is just as true or false as any other religious set.

One thing I don't see from Big TOE, is predictions. What would he expect, for instance, to be a viable means of a star drive, wormholes and such? Would they be possible with human style physics, that is to say, attainable with more or less what we know now?
What would it say about life on other planets, or about evolution or genesis of life?
What would it say about the possibility of finding more advanced life than human?
Does his TOE say anything at all about any of that?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well, Campbell was clearly pushing his book. As far as spirituality goes, it is just as true or false as any other religious set.

One thing I don't see from Big TOE, is predictions. What would he expect, for instance, to be a viable means of a star drive, wormholes and such? Would they be possible with human style physics, that is to say, attainable wit ...[text shortened]... y of finding more advanced life than human?
Does his TOE say anything at all about any of that?

No i think you are right, after all, it's not really a scientific theory. I think what I like about it is the way it explains the double split experiment and 'spooky-action-at-a-distance' and so on, which I've yet to encounter comprehensible explanation for from a current paradigm. That said, i'm no physicist!

This is a great video about the double slit experiment, without meta-physics rearing its ugly head and interfering with science where it shouldn't interfere:

YouTube

Originally posted by Great King Rat
[youtube]fT8LaMrn_MM[/youtube]

18 minutes of non-sensical hippy wishy-washy claptrap. I gave up after "love and lower entropy are mirror images".

Nice. I like it.

I guess it comes down to accepting that bit about conciousness being the base for all experiences, or that everything springs from conciousness. If you dont believe that then you cant really move through this stuff..

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
This guy is a physicist and a bit of a hippy. He's on YouTube explaining his 'Big TOE' (theory of everything) - I can't remember if I'm allowed to post youtube links here so I won't, but it's an easy one to find, just google the thread title adding 'youtube' to the search field if you're interested. There's quite a lot of it, but it's broken down int ...[text shortened]... and you can get the gist pretty quickly. I'd be interested to hear anybody's views on his views.

He may be a 'bit of a hippy', but he's clearly not 'hippy' enough.

His TOE is really just a TOEEG (Theory Of Everything, Except God).

I'm not calling his theory bunk, just because it leaves out God. Science doesn't really concern itself with God, and it does a remarkably good job of describing a universe without God, because that is why we have free will, after all.

Maybe I'm just nit-picking the name, because it's clearly NOT a Theory of Everything if it leaves out God. I just want to be clear on what it is.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Well, Campbell was clearly pushing his book. As far as spirituality goes, it is just as true or false as any other religious set.

One thing I don't see from Big TOE, is predictions. What would he expect, for instance, to be a viable means of a star drive, wormholes and such? Would they be possible with human style physics, that is to say, attainable wit ...[text shortened]... y of finding more advanced life than human?
Does his TOE say anything at all about any of that?

Correct. A real ToE should be able to predict these things, but it might need another 'big idea' guy (like another Einstein) to ferret them out.

The biggest ideas always come from the shoulders of giants.

Originally posted by Suzianne
He may be a 'bit of a hippy', but he's clearly not 'hippy' enough.

His TOE is really just a TOEEG (Theory Of Everything, Except God).

I'm not calling his theory bunk, just because it leaves out God. Science doesn't really concern itself with God, and it does a remarkably good job of describing a universe without God, because that is why we have free ...[text shortened]... clearly NOT a Theory of Everything if it leaves out God. I just want to be clear on what it is.

While some people believe there is a god, there is really no reason for a theory of everything to take the existence thereof as a given. In fact, it seems to me that if the existence of god is accepted, the rest of the theory is kind of redundant anyway.

Originally posted by avalanchethecat
While some people believe there is a god, there is really no reason for a theory of everything to take the existence thereof as a given. In fact, it seems to me that if the existence of god is accepted, the rest of the theory is kind of redundant anyway.

And such a god, if it exists at all, is clearly hands off for humans, 3 yo dying from cancer is not my idea of a compassionate god and all the atrocities of the past, the latest one I heard about was King Leopold of Belgium buying up the Congo like 130 odd years ago and then a holocaust much greater than the Jewish ones of WW2, like 10 million africans dying from starvation, worked to death. Not much a compassionate god to allow that sort of thing, the clear message, even granting a god, it cares a rats ass about the fate of humans, much as the religous set adores it and thinks it is so wonderful and loving.
I say BS to that, 500 million dead from disease and war is not compassion to me, it clearly strikes as uncaring if there is some kind of god in the first place.

Originally posted by sonhouse
And such a god, if it exists at all, is clearly hands off for humans, 3 yo dying from cancer is not my idea of a compassionate god and all the atrocities of the past, the latest one I heard about was King Leopold of Belgium buying up the Congo like 130 odd years ago and then a holocaust much greater than the Jewish ones of WW2, like 10 million africans dyin ...[text shortened]... ompassion to me, it clearly strikes as uncaring if there is some kind of god in the first place.

Preaching to the converted my friend. The god of the bible is too ridiculous for words.