Sunday, November 18, 2007

Oooh--Representation of Everything--it's pretty!


Okay, call me a "depth whore" and get it over with--I like big, interesting ideas. The idea of a kind of "Unified Theory of Everything" that finally makes all the pieces fit and is elegant and ties gravity in nicely is really appealing to me--especially since I'm a total non-math person and need the "For Dummies" version to really get what it's all about. I can be completely blinded with science, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.

So I kind of dug the recent Telegraph article being linked everywhere on teh internets probably for little more reason than--well, the above awesome graphic.

I know that I am not competent to review the theory, but I have a deep aesthetic preference for the expanation of how things hang together in this universe to be simple and kind of, well, pretty. The phrase "Exceptionally Simple" seems awfully handy for how I'd like the universe to ultimately be found. We just thought it was more complicated than it was. All those subatomic peculiar spooky-acting particles and the forces that kept'em dancing? Just a foxtrot, really. Basically, I want to see reality as a Spirograph drawing. I kind of want the fabric of the time/space continuum to seem like Indra's net of jewels cast out in front of us, and we, mankind, finally get to inspect the weave. I want the thing to be simple enough that there actually will be a "for Dummies" version, and reasonably clever Scientific American subscribers and gifted undergrads will eventually just be like, hey--the universe, it's neat and pretty and we get it. The answer was 42 . Or was it?

Which is why I'm a little impatient to see some peer-reviewage. Does it Blend?

No comments:

Nancy Mace is not Okay

  This picture is a screencap from Rep. Mace's own Twitter-feed (I'm still not calling it "X") and this is s few days in t...