Thank you for all your corrections. I've had a eureka moment on the theory of everything.

GR models the past. QM models the future. It was so obvious. They are theories of time.

28 minutes ago, AbstractDreamer said:

Thank you for all your corrections. I've had a eureka moment on the theory of everything.

GR models the past. QM models the future. It was so obvious. They are theories of time.

I've had a John McEnroe moment:

You cannot be serious!

20 hours ago, AbstractDreamer said:

Thank you for all your corrections. I've had a eureka moment on the theory of everything.

GR models the past. QM models the future. It was so obvious. They are theories of time.

A TOE is combining these concepts somehow, a quantum theory of gravity.

Also, we know there were quantum effects in the past, fusion in stars and last scattering 380,000 years after the BBC.

1 hour ago, pinball1970 said:

A TOE is combining these concepts somehow, a quantum theory of gravity.

Also, we know there were quantum effects in the past, fusion in stars and last scattering 380,000 years after the BBC.

I'd put it even more simply: GR was valid 5 minutes ago, but not 5 minutes from now? Quantum mechanics will be valid only after I finish my ice cream?

There is no such thing in physics as "the present" (the all-pervading separator between past and future as far as human experience is concerned).

What is the present, according to physics? If you have an answer, any answer, let me know.

Thereby my McEnroe point.

1 hour ago, joigus said:

What is the present, according to physics? If you have an answer, any answer, let me know.

I can tell you what the present was a while ago ;)

Probably a good idea if @AbstractDreamer could expand on his statement.

Edited June 14Jun 14 by pinball1970

1 hour ago, pinball1970 said:

Probably a good idea if @AbstractDreamer could expand on his statement.

That would probably be considered hijacking. Maybe @AbstractDreamer could expand on their statement in a thread of their own, I suppose. Not for me to decide anyway.

33 minutes ago, joigus said:

That would probably be considered hijacking. Maybe @AbstractDreamer could expand on their statement in a thread of their own, I suppose. Not for me to decide anyway.

Oops, yes it's Externo not Abstract Dreamer. Apologies.