Thread: Big Bang and Time Travel

Is man doing the right thing in seeking for a Grand Unified Theory ? Is he on the right path ? Or, does the GUT exist at all ? Perhaps all the matter that exists are a result of universal chaos since time began...

If you develop a GUT then you basically have the Math to predict 'everything'. In that case you could predict the future, right?

Originally Posted by Chucky

If you develop a GUT then you basically have the Math to predict 'everything'. In that case you could predict the future, right?

no.
the universe is not deturministic.

apparently god does play dice.

Hawking, while brilliant, doesn't deserve to be in the same grouping as Newton or Einstein, in terms of impact on the field. I would've chosen James Clerk Maxwell as the third for the grouping (and then perhaps Shroedinger or Bohr).

Einstein did:
capillary forces
brownian motion
Einstein-Simha equation: viscosity of suspensions
Stoke-Einstein equations of light scattering
special relativity
general relativity
photoelectric effect
critical opalescence
Bose-Einstein condensate

All of these discoveries, taken separately, could merit a Nobel.

Newton did:
Universal gravitation
three laws of motion
Principia (which set new standards on scientific exposition)
generalized binomial theorem
calculus (Leibniz independently discovered too)
Newton-Raphston method
wave theory of light, plus corpuscular theory of light
diffraction of light
concept of the gold standard (economics)

Hawking did:
mini Black Holes
Black Hole thermodynamics and information theory

Alexander Fleming is my favorite. He discovered penicilline. he saved millions of lives, and his invention still saves lives...

:-D

Edward Jenner isn't bad either, he was the inventor of the vaccine of small pox.

I chose Newton firstly because he developed the first set of equations that were to be the birth of Physics. Secondly, subsequent scientists used his work as starting points for their reasearch. Finally, he did his work in a time when equipment would have been poor in quality.