User talk:Publius222

Apparently there are some that state that the "Talk Page" or tab labeled "discussion" relative to the Theory of Everything content is not for discussion and not for people's theories, and I quote:

'"<<>>

'Don't feed trolls. Wikipedia is not place for personal theories. Please don't engage in discussions here. There are plenty of other places on 'net to chat. This talk page is for discussing encyclopedic content of the current article'. `'mikka 19:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC"'

I would hate to think that some Physics P.H.D., grad student or otherwise was so stuck on themself that he/she would so fallaciously assume that those not trained in that field of expertise or even trained at all could not or would not have anything of substance to offer this "Theory of Everything".

I postulate that TOE can be simply summed up as 1=infinity. The fact that we don't know everything, a la "All we know is that we know nothing" or better a wise man knows that the depth of his knowledge and understanding is but a grain of sand when compared to universal knowledge.

Again, 1 (everyone and everything) is equal to infinity ((all the variables, all that we know and don't know (at this time)).

Obviously an equation that will not and should not ever be proven, but merely worked on constantly, for as long as we as a race can survive.

I believe that everyone and everything can and should contibute, because after all we all a part of the E in TOE. Too many physicists and people in specialized fields are so deep into the specifics that they are prone to miss the simplist of truths or the "can't see the forest for the trees" and therefore spend their life's work rushing to a dead end (which is often vital to serendipitous discovery.

As far as one of the questions raised on the TOE "discussion" tab:

' TOE and religion 'Religion in general has no clear relationship to a physical Theory of Everything. Most theists believe the universe should operate according to consistent principles because they believe it to have been designed by a good God. Some theists believe no ToE will be found, perhaps because of a desire not to exclude God from the normal workings of the universe. Some theorists believe that a comprehensive ToE will, out of necessity, include information on how the primary creative force relates to the rest of creation 'Finally, many expect that a ToE, like modern physics, would be agnostic as it would by definition describe only the universe. 'Some theorists believe that a comprehensive ToE will, out of necessity, include information on how the primary creative force relates to the rest of creation''"

This part in particular is on the right path:

Some theorists believe that a comprehensive ToE will, out of necessity, include information on how the primary creative force relates to the rest of creation and so is Some theorists believe that a comprehensive ToE will, out of necessity, include information on how the primary creative force relates to the rest of creation"

Religion was created as the oldest proponent for the ToE and it is naturally the traditions handed down over generations to designed to explain and satiate the desire to understand "what it all means", "where do we come from", etc.

I will end this rant with two quotes:

"Changes are not permanent, but change is" -Neil Peart of Rush

"Rufus: He still digs humanity, but it bothers Him to see the sh*t that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, but especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it. Bethany: Having beliefs isn't good? Rufus: I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant."'' -from Dogma (Kevin Smith)

The State of The End of The Millennium Address
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The State of The End of The Millennium Address, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.skaponk.com/lyrics/210. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 18:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The State of The End of The Millennium Address
A tag has been placed on The State of The End of The Millennium Address requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Rockstone35 (talk) 18:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)