This conversation is closed.

The true theory of everything: the Theory of Feelings.

I always wonder why it seems that physics, or even science IS mathematics?

Maybe that’s a revelation that this world (including the possible multiverse) is built upon one feeling only, that is, number. (yes, numbers are a feeling, just like colors are a feeling.)

That’s why mathematics-based modern science can’t even begin to take on the question about feelings, for example, what is blue?

Lights of different frequencies causing the retina cells to send signals to the brain and brain cells firing each there? Don’t tell me that, is blue. Come on, I am not 3.

So, what I am guessing might be the future Theory of Everything is something like this:

Just like Plato’s heaven made of forms,

Loo’s heaven is made of feelings.

Plato thinks that feelings are just empirical, low-level things.
But I don’t think so. Feelings include almost all platonic forms.

And, because this world is made of one of the feelings, that is, number, it’s still part of the Loo’s heaven. Isn’t that like a piece of possible good news?

Well, not that I am arrogant or anything, Loo’s heaven is just a “figuratively speaking”.
But I do want to challenge the whole community of modern science with this simple question:

What is blue, anyway?

  • thumb
    Feb 27 2014: I can't understand 100% your question but personally, I don't reckon numbers are feelings. My math is rusty, but I am a very emotional person. I can go through quite a lot of different types of feelings each day without having to do any math. And when i did do some math, all I had ever felt was "irritated'. So at least to me, numbers can't possibly represent feelings. Otherwise, every number would mean "irritated".

    By the way, LOVE IS BLUE. there's a song that proves it.
    • Feb 28 2014: :) just like the doc in "Back to the Future", well, finally he is in love, says in the movie that woman is the greatest mystery in the universe.

      you got it right there to me, numbers can't describe feelings. that's exactly my point, although i don't know why so many men still are finding answer in the brain cells firing each other.

      Oh, I am a guy, BTW. haha, maybe future TOE belong to women thinkers, :)


      think of "up", and "down", or that guy being "stuborn" or , the word BIG, these concepts can be a kind of feelings too, then i think like, 3, can be a feeling too. numbers are sort of a concept too.
  • thumb
    Feb 25 2014: I'm no scientist but I believe you are making quite a lot of assumptions there friend. I don't speak for the scientific community but I think there are a few things that need to be cleared out. I believe mathematics is just another language, something we use to describe something. Thus it is not wrong to imagine the world in the language of math, just as it is not wrong to imagine the world in the language of feelings, just as you have. saying math IS feeling is like saying English IS Chinese. As fellow languages however, being able to describe everything in your own way does not mean that the things you describe really ARE how you describe them to be. This is sometimes hard to come to grips with since we never see anything beyond how we see them ourselves. Thus, by the true theory of everything, that could mean there are as many TOEs as there are people that see it. That does not necessarily mean that there is no 'real' or 'true' TOE or objective reality. I'm just saying that we must avoid hasty conclusions and present our theories with the best evidence or reason that we as a human race could muster in order to approximate as close as we can to describe the ever elusive objective reality. That would mean the integration and differentiation of all the TOEs that we could think of, and running all possible scenario on that super TOE model. Then and only then could we say that hey! I think we may have SOMETHING here. Science is harsh yes, that why we should never stop asking questions. Keep up the ideas and good day sir!
    • Feb 28 2014: Thanks for the long comment, read it many times. :)

      immature assumptions and thoughts of mine.
      1, think of it this way, mathmatics is an language we use to describe numbers, and the phisical world is built upon numbers, not mathmatics. i mean ordinary numbers like 1 2 3.

      2, Steven Wolfram is already making an attempt to make a space-less model with just some dots and connections, something he called network that is not based on the concept of space. He actually inspired me to come up with this wild guess of TOE.

      3, if we think of mathmatics like English, then the metaphor is that Mathmatics is just one of many languages in the world. it's only a language for this phisical world.

      4, Penrose is guessing that there is a platonic heaven too, he too is puzzled by feelings, in his book "the Empero's New Mind."
      • thumb
        Feb 28 2014: Well i don't like the word 'immature' that much. All thoughts are of equal value that's why we have fora such as these so that we can share them.
        1) I don't think it that way myself. Those ordinary numbers you refer to I believe, is just another way to describe physical things. i could say that i have '3' apples, or i have 'several' apples. both are just descriptions.
        2) I'm familiar with sir Wolfram's work. I fact, I will probably be citing him in my own research. However, as I said. Being able to describe our world in terms of math or 'cellular automatons' doesn't mean that the world is indeed those things.
        3) yes I believe so. In fact, some mathematician find it difficult not to expound their proofs using ONLY math. As such it is possible to 'talk' using pure math.
        4) Feelings are fuzzy at the moment so for now, anybody is entitled to their own opinion about it.
        Nice thoughts! Just remember that there is always a possibility that whatever we believe could be wrong after all. Please treat my comments as more of opinion than fact. After all, i'm just human, and I could be wrong. :)
  • Feb 24 2014: The opposite is true, actually. Feeling is a product of processes described by the hard sciences (physics, chemistry...) occurring in a living brain, not the other way around.

    The physical and chemical reactions in our brains aren't indecipherable, and there is no reason to suggest they aren't describable by mathematical models, they're merely very complex, and therefore aren't fully understood. Yet, at least.
    • thumb
      Feb 26 2014: .
      The reactions would be the something like data packages in the computation in my previous comment to mmlmm loo.
    • Feb 28 2014: given time and space and particles, the body is in this world,
      our brain cells firing eather other, it doesn't matter how complicated the whole picture of firing is,

      how can any "feeling of color" come to being in such a machanical-like system?

      that is perhaps the biggest mystery in the world.
    • Feb 28 2014: From all the posts ive read of yours Nadav, you seem like a very sharp person and i always enjoy hearing your thoughts here in the conversations. That being said your post brought one of my earlier responses to mind and it seems worth reposting.

      Feb 14 2014: "Previous generations have been absolutely convinced that their scientific theories were well-nigh perfect, only for it to turn out that they had missed the point entirely. Why should it be any different for our generation? Beware of scientific fundamentalists who try to tell you everything is pretty much worked out, and only a few routine details are left to do. It is just when the majority of scientists believe such things that the next revolution in our world-view creeps into being, its feeble birth-squeaks all but drowned by the ear-splitting roar of orthodoxy." The Science of Discworld by Terry Pratchett, Ian Stewart, & Jack Cohen
  • Mar 20 2014: Blue is black when there is no light .
    What is black any way?, Just absence of light.
    So technically there are no colors only light and absence of light. But still who senses it ? Thats where feeling arise. That feeling is "I" "me" and "Myself"
  • Mar 18 2014: It is boring at the top of the food chain. Writing an equation that states what blue is but doesn't EXPLAIN what blue is, is a symptom of boredom. 1blue=(1magenta+1yellow)/2
  • Feb 28 2014: Read Goethe. .. Essential !


  • Feb 28 2014: Interesting thought. Makes me wonder if the roots of logic are feelings.
  • Feb 28 2014: Hi IMMimm, you may be interested in this article in relation to feelings and thoughts. Which causes which..

    It helps if we believe in dualism and are open to influences from the other side. Basically our feelings are generated, or caused, by the 'other side' and we react to them with our thoughts, as I understand it.

    http://www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy/instructor/gloss/wu.html#The Primacy

    This is one aspect of the color blue. As explained in the "science of correspondences."

    I feel tired :)
    • Feb 28 2014: Thanks you VERY MUCH, such rich readings offered. must be really late in your time zone.

      it's midday here though. Sleep well, my friend.
      • Feb 28 2014: Sorry Immimm, I just noticed that the first link has a space in "#The Primacy" which prevents us to go to just the right spot on the page.

        If you just want to go to that one spot, In the box "Contents" it is the third item on the list.

        A better name of that whole page might be 'The true theory of everything" LOL
        Hope you had a good sleep, and have a great weekend

        You mentioned numbers.. the last link also has a section about the spiritual meaning of numbers.
  • thumb
    Feb 27 2014: Blue is like a beanstalk, isn't it?

    "...Let me remind you of the pilgrim who
    asked for an audience with the Dalai Lama.

    meaning of life, father.'

    beanstalk, isn't it?'

    - from the song by 'Procol Harum', "In Held 'Twas In I"

    • Feb 28 2014: Thanks. :)

      sometimes i have some insights, in a certain state of mind, i think i will have more insights, just got to find the ways. and at the same time I am following what is going on in science too.
  • thumb
    Feb 26 2014: .
    By common sense, feelings are the results of computation of the data in our brain.
    The data consist of our ancestors' successful experiences in DNA and those we acquired today.
  • Feb 25 2014: My eyes tell me what blue is. But I can't share it with anyone. And I don't need to because I already know that they already know what blue is. What I want to know is why is it that what goes up must come down? Come on scientists, forget blue, do GRAVITY!
    • thumb
      Feb 26 2014: I'm not a physicist but I've tried my best to look into that problem. The main problem with gravity as NASA said, is that we don't know for sure if its a particle or the inherent property of non-Euclidean space. Kind of like, we don't know if its the dot on the piece of paper or the whole paper itself. Quantum gravitation is incredibly confusing because the equations and instruments start to tell different things. Its actually fascinating to study. :)
    • Feb 28 2014: Well, in my intuition, gravity seems to be within the realm of numbers, so i think modern science is going to solve that problem sooner or later. i want to sit on a tiny flying saucer to see the world too, instead i got this noisy gasoline sucker-copter, :)

      But, what i worry most is that even if we solve all the puzzles phisical world, we would sill be stuck with the current technology forever. like, we have to build a factory as big as the solar system to produce antimatter.

      some people are already suggesting that flying saucer need "thinking" or "feeling" technology. that is, you got to think or feel your way during the flight.
    • Feb 28 2014: Yes GRAVITY.. it's everywhere and might be the physical 'expression' or result of Divine Love.

      There is the (spiritual) attraction of love that we all know. We can say we're close, or attracted to someone even when they are on another continent.

      Without gravity we could not exist, there would be no air, no weight, thus no traction, etc. So also, could we exist without God?

      Just some basic thoughts. This is about Creation that might be of interest even though it mentions gravity only once.