This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Causality is the theory of everything
Theory:
1) Everything has a cause and an effect.
2) Everything is a cause and/or effect of some sort.
3) One cause can be the effect of another thing. One effect can be the cause of another thing.
Proof:
There are two kinds of worlds:
1) a logical world, which follows the rules of Cause and Effect
2) an illogical world, which means there is no Cause and Effect.
So let's say there is a hypothetical world where there is a ball moving at the speed of light in a direction. If this was an illogical world, then that would mean there is no cause for the ball to do this. If there is no cause, and that the ball is moving, then why is it doing it? Why is there a ball anyways? Why is there even a world where there's a ball moving at speed of light? If there's no cause, then why's it doing it? That means, that in an illogical world, nothing would exist, because simply because there is no cause or reason for anything to exist.
Thus, an illogical world cannot exist. And if an illogical world cannot exist, then by process of elimination, there can only be a logical world. A world where there is cause and effect. Thus, that would mean that everything we know, everything that has happened, everything that we do, must have a cause and effect.
paul Ashton
James Zhang 30+
I also heard that Deep Depression is also caused by a strong level of boredom.
Sym !
James Zhang 30+
Sym !
James Zhang 30+
edward johnson
edward johnson
Ken brown 30+
and since we don't know if all things are cyclic and the evidence is based on comp models of the CMB,we still won't know unless we actually get to witness an event but regardless it comes back to what i said.
James Zhang 30+
edward johnson
James Zhang 30+
edward johnson
James Zhang 30+
Efrain Torres
In this world nothing is wasted and looks that the logic rules it.
Krisztián Pintér 200+
James Zhang 30+
Just cuz such a simple rule can create infinite possibilities and cool effects
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Efrain Torres
Krisztián Pintér 200+
Robert Winner 50+
This sounds like a question a prof would throw out to his class if he needed to go to the toliet. Just keep on fighting and I'll be right back.
This is Philosophical not scientific. Good try but I do not think I'll bite on this one.
All the best. Bob.
James Zhang 30+
So then the true theory of everything would mean it would include all that is logical and all that is illogical, or all that is logical and illogical, or nothing that is illogical nor logical, or else it wouldn't include everything if this were not the case.
Robert Winner 50+
Every time I see ALL, EVERY, NO EXCEPTIONS, ALL INCLUSIVE, etc ... The red flag goes up. You want an absolute fom me. Can not do it. You want a different answer ask a different question.
All the best. Bob.
James Zhang 30+
James Zhang 30+
Robert Winner 50+
As a PHd candidate you will have your documents challenged and you must defend your findings or you will fail.
The oak tree is might and stong. However, it is the willow that is flexable and survives the storm. Learning is a series of comprimises. Adjust, adapt, and overcome.
All the best .... Doctor Zhang .... Bob.
James Zhang 30+
I try to be really honest about my answers and questions as well, and in the end we can really only do what we believe in anyways.
lol if you really think I'll be a PHD candidate
Robert Winner 50+
To achieve it ... Believe it.
Bob.
James Zhang 30+
Robert Winner 50+
If you wish contact me on my profile e-mail for further discussion..
Bob.
James Zhang 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
"Quantum mechanics says, I believe, that randomness is real at a fundamental physical level."
it is kinda tricky. in quantum mechanics, the actual wave function and its time evolution is fully deterministic and reversible, just like in any other models in physics. the only random is the result of measuring some characteristic of a particle that it is not "tuned in" for. the details of this randomness is largely a mystery, and its nature is debated. but indeed, it is a candidate for real randomness in the world.
Simon Hulshoff
Everything Nothing
Always Never
Everything x Always = + x + = +
Everything x Never = + x - = -
Nothing x Always = + x - = -
Nothing x Never = - x - = +
That is your proof
James Zhang 30+
natasha nikulina 50+
3)there is a quantum world where Effect can be observed as prior to Cause.
Actually, cause/effect is one 'thing' we perceive as two because of Time that separates them ,creating Space for them to occur in sequence.
James Zhang 30+
natasha nikulina 50+
Would you agree that there is an inevitable confusion here ?
Classical 'cause and effect' is placed on the arrow of time and moves from past to future, it's clear and simple.
And then we use an axe for peeling potatoes ; cause/effect that is one and happening at once or effect that comes before the cause are not ' cause and effect' any more, it's a different phenomenon. In another words: we use Newtonian/Cartesian vocabulary to describe a quantum phenomenon, no wonder, it doesn't work.
Surprisingly,a fuzzy language of sacred texts cope with this task much better: " Before Abraham was I am " " The seer is the seen "( !!!!! ). It doesn't mean that for ToE we need another descriptive terminology ( maybe we do, but it is not the point ) we need a new way of thinking , new Paradigm.
I am seriously doubting that we'll manage to connect all dots within an old one :)
James Zhang 30+
But yeah, you're right, it doesn't make sense that we can describe quantum phenomena with classical terms. We do need a new paradigm of some sort.
I had a thought. I know there are paradoxes in a lot of useful theories out there. Is it even possible to create a legitimate theory on paradoxes themselves? Wouldn't that theory on paradoxes become a paradox itself, cuz it's like trying to make a logic with something illogical. Then that thing that's illogical won't be illogical anymore...
Henk Mulder 10+
That has always been my own conclusion and until such day that physicists and philosopher's come up with a mechanism that has such an existential bootstrap at its core, their work won't be done (because otherwise there would always be another cause to explain)
natasha nikulina 50+
" I am because I am. It is because it is." beyond is event horizon.
In short, i agree with you :)
Henk Mulder 10+
natasha nikulina 50+
Eastern Mysticism ( there is nothing mystic about it, apart that we call it this way ) 'observed' the Whole not cutting it into parts. Ancient philosophers/teachers 'experienced ' the Whole , they didn't study 'parts' and viewed a part as a reflection of the Whole with little if any significance outside the Whole. Chinese/Indian ancient meditative or contemplative techniques allowed to tap directly into the wave of information, into non algorithmic depth of knowing. It's how knowing
( wave ) differs from scientific knowledge or knowing about.
Sacred teachings/science is not less accurate than western science, but it doesn't have a 'voice' and brings the 'knowing' here to us in a vague metaphoric language of stories, myths, parables, deep in meaning ( primitive for some ) theories on the nature of reality. .And i think, it's the spirit of our time, our Zeitgeist - we start to recognize science in old age teachings. Re- cognize means ' to know again ".
Maybe it was meant to be this way ?
I don't know :)
Thanks for responding !
James Zhang 30+
...dang... lol
Linda Taylor 50+
That is the problem with cause and effect linear thinking. It does't work.
I disagree with your theory major premise number one. Where did 'everything' come from?
James Zhang 30+
Linda Taylor 50+
Cause and effect is a fine theory in a finite world but it is nowhere near the theory of everything.
The universe cannot be explained linearly.
James Zhang 30+
Ok, so then what I'm getting from a lot of these comments are that Cause and Effect is NOT the theory for everything. But at least it's possible that it is the theory to explain our universe, not other universes, from my understanding currently...
Linda Taylor 50+
It may help explain the physical universe but does not apply in all cases, origins of the universe case in point. It is always a good discussion so kudos to the question.
James Zhang 30+
Bah, *mind blown*
natasha nikulina 50+
Sounds true, but it doesn't imply that it is not here in our world, simply we can't get there via dual logic .
Rhona Pavis 50+
paul Ashton
BBC 4 - Dangerous knowledge
The Atom
M- theory
PBS Nova (on you tube)
-Hunting the Hidden Dimension (fractals)
-The Elegant Universe (series of 3 or four shows related to the bbc material but older-optional but simply explanitory)
(hokey but thought provoking)
Holographic Universe (Part 1)
Introduction and Illustration on the Holographic Principle
-explains the role of black holes and potential information storage
Quantum Consciousness, Quantum Mind STUART HAMEROFF (P.1)
(also check out his website by the same title for a little light reading)
Check out on Ted.com -
Lucianne Walkowicz: Finding planets around other stars
Aaron O'Connell: Making sense of a visible quantum object
Andrea Ghez: The hunt for a supermassive black hole
James Zhang 30+
paul Ashton
paul Ashton
Lars Mews
An unlogical world is possible, when we consider that our mind is not able to understand everything. See, our "logic" is based on what we know and where we live. On planet earth logic works like you explained it, but that must not mean that this is like that anywhere and at any place. And it could not be explained by our system of logic, while our logic at least points at the possibility, because it is logical right that we are limited in our ability to understand things.
We are limited by the place we live and by the form in which we exist. If 0=0 and 0=1 would be logic at the same time and place, it would all collapse. But it could exist beside each other and create a frame. Then it would be logical again, and also unlogical, because in our minds everything must begin and end somewhere. And something cannot evolve from nothing-maybe we simply cannot answer this, because it would literally make us go mad.
Maybe it is the other way around, that our logic universe is inside unlogical universes, what could explain why it exists. Other way round you could not explain it, a logic universe would not create unlogic universes. Maybe we are just a random mistake?
James Zhang 30+
pat gilbert 50+
I think they had it right at the end of Forest Gump it is both but more is predictable than most would say is. But what about the idea that randomness was caused as well?
James Zhang 30+
pat gilbert 50+
I cannot prove any of this but most religions believe some flavor of this.
James Zhang 30+
pat gilbert 50+
I'm not trying to be esoteric although it is hard on this subject. I'm just saying that we (you and I and everyone else) are the beings who are not a part of the universe. I'm not saying you have a soul I'm saying you are a soul.
James Zhang 30+
Do you refer "universe" as "everything?" Cuz it seems that some other comments refer "everything" as multiple universes.
pat gilbert 50+
James Zhang 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
James Zhang 30+
Krisztián Pintér 200+
1. it is not new. determinism is the current mainstream scientific view
2. why? what makes you believe that?
James Zhang 30+
So what causes me to believe this? Society. Because society has progressed advanced enough to allow me to think like this. Because if I were to spread all my thoughts in 500 years ago's society, I may be shot because society didn't accept such radical thinkings.
So then why do I feel or think in the first place? Why do I think certain things are right and wrong? Because we are intelligent enough.
Why are we intelligent enough? Because evolution allowed us to be, or at least that's what the theory implies.
So then why was there evolution in the first place? Because maybe the environment was just right.
Why was the environment just right? How was the Earth made? Maybe the Big Bang explains this.
And I can pretty much go on forever, as the theory of causality implies.
So then what was the purpose of the environment creating this human intelligent life? Maybe it just is what it is. We live simply because we live perhaps. We are intelligent simply because it happened, the circumstances were right.
And I think this also makes sense because why would life be born to kill itself? It doesn't make sense. It is from what I described, Illogical, so it wouldn't exist. Because it makes no sense for life to be born just so it can unborn itself. It might as well just not be born in the first place, unless it had a reason...
Dammit, someone prove me wrong on this!
James Zhang 30+
James Zhang 30+
Fritzie Reisner 100+
James Zhang 30+
Gerald O'brian 50+
James Zhang 30+
Gerald O'brian 50+
Hence... necessity is the mother of causality?
James Zhang 30+
An illogical world is like saying 0=1. But 0=/=1. 0=0, this can only be true. But since 0=0 is correct, then that means that it is logical, and logical cannot be illogical. So 0=0 cannot also be 0=1, because 0=1 is illogical.