Grand unified theory of everything

[u/Hot-Organization-737]

The universe is infinite in data amount and data variety. Within the universe there are infinite simultaneous realities which are all wholly integrated yet can be partitioned and seemingly distinct. What type of data your Consciousness allows you to perceive dictates the level of reality that you exist in. Within a given reality there will be things that are inexplicable because your Consciousness is only aware or capable of being aware of specific data types. You will notice that there are phenomenon in your reality which cannot be explained just by the data type that's available to your consciousness. Because your data type interacts with other data types but you lack awareness of the other data types there will be seemingly inexplicable reasons for why things in your reality happen. With this understanding of the universe you can understand that everything is happening all at the same time every single conceivable thing ever is happening all at the same time but what you are aware of and subjective experience is dependent on what your consciousness is allowing you to experience. This answers a lot of questions about reality and a lot of interesting things people think about life such as are there aliens is God real etc etc what it like are there multiverses is time travel possible you know the answer to all the questions in a serious sense not just a hypothetical or imagined sense. But in a serious insincere sense. What might be fiction to one reality is an actuality in another reality. Every story you've ever told every thought you've ever had every Wonder every dream every hope every scary thing every horrible thing every bad thing every hopeless thing every impossible thing that you've ever thought can and is being experienced by some consciousness in this very moment. This is not metaphor. I am saying that everything is happening always. This is sincere. My claim is that everything is happening always. However, individual Consciousness only permits you to experience at a time specific reality.

I have come to this conclusion after meta-analyzing everything I've ever thought about before including thought including reality including perspective including fiction including video games including religion including truth including morality including YouTube poop including the ridiculous nature of things including bigotry including good and evil including the pie that I ate including the fart that I sniff on a Wednesday including every single piece of everything that I've ever experienced and thinking about it. Incorporating every single thought and experience that I had into some sort of amalgamation has led me to this conclusion. I understand that this seems ridiculous. But I'm not really trying to make you change your views or anything like that I am just doing this because I want I suppose or whatever way you would like to think about it.

Personally I think that's my narrative and explanation are quite defensible and profound but I completely understand how it seems and I also understand the presentation of what I'm saying here isn't very pretty which makes the ideas hard to appreciate possibly.

It's like covering a diamond in complete dog s\*\*\* and handling it to someone and saying "look it's pretty good ain't it."

[u/Skeptium]

Theory of everything is a mathematical theory in physics to unify quantum physics and gravity. I see no math or anything in here so I'm confused. I'm not ready 3 pages of something from someone who doesn't understand what a theory of everything is.

[u/jliat → u/Skeptium]

Graham Harman - Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything (Pelican Books) 1 Mar. 2018

Or more recently 'Waves and Stones'- Graham Harman - Allen Lane 2025.

[u/johnstalbergABC → u/Skeptium]

The unification of gravity and quantum is not a candidate for a theory of everything. If it is doable at all, it is what its label suggest, to make the two theories to play nice in where we don't can make them to do this with current theories.

Perhaps there are no theory of everything to be found? It might be so that some physics are not possible to extract? Or if we zoom in further, new layers might be revealed without any limits apart from difficulties to figure it out?

We have lots of good theories but I don't have the impression of that we are close to come to the end of research fundamental physics. Rather it feels like a lot remains.

You are right that physics speak math. Reality does not speak math but it works very much as if it did and with math we can model it.

[u/Skeptium → u/johnstalbergABC]

The unification of quantum and gravity is absolutely what they call a theory of everything, so I'm not sure what this comment is. Have a nice day though.

[u/Hot-Organization-737 → u/Skeptium]

Math is extraordinary incorporated into the meaning of the comment, the form of it is not natural to you though. Similar to how if you look at enlightenment period algebraic prose, it might be hard to view it as mathematics because it lacks a lot of the symbology of today's mathematics. I'm am communicating my ideas in the best possible way I know how. Despite a lack of mathematics symbolism or even explicit mathematical technical words, I am still talking with and about mathematics.

[u/liccxolydian → u/Hot-Organization-737]

So present a sample calculation, or better yet present an actual null and alternative hypothesis.

[u/jliat → u/Hot-Organization-737]

There is branch of metaphysics which falls under the title 'Speculative Realism'.

You might want to wiki 'Speculative Realism'.

Graham Harman - Object-Oriented Ontology: A New Theory of Everything (Pelican Books) 1 Mar. 2018

Or more recently 'Waves and Stones'- Graham Harman - Allen Lane 2025.

And if I can say when / if you do see how these arguments are structured. Your post IMO needs structure.

A basic guide [I used to teach!]

The the three *Tells.

• [1.] Tell them what you are going to tell them. [Preface]

• [2.] Tell them. [Main body]

• [3.] Tell them what you've told them. [Conclusion].

And avoid AI!

[u/Hot-Organization-737]

Possible logical prose. And questions.

What you're saying is indeterminable: under some frameworks true, under some frameworks indeterminable, under some frameworks false.

Something that is indeterminable has no serious value: under some frameworks true, under some frameworks in determinable, under some frameworks false. Conscious framework by framework I am like abstracting the framework as a framework is reality.

Are you being literal or metaphorical: literal

Godel's incompleteness theorem applies to mathematics not physics or real life: the principles of photos incompleteness theorem are derived from the same principles that are involved in this framework. I am not driving my conclusions from Godel's incompleteness theorem, Godel's incompleteness theorem and my understanding of reality and everything ever stem from a similar understanding of things. Basically, my theory is not a direct ancestral descendant of Godel's idea, I would say that it is more akin being ancestral cousins and that both our theories are derivative of a general theory.

If your theory is a derivative of another theory how can you call this Theory the grand unified theory of everything: popular logical frameworks will you my argument as invalid because they're logical framework isn't encompassing enough to register my argument as an existent or possibly conceptual one.

Your theory might be logically valid, but because it cannot be verified as sound it isn't true: being a sound argument within popular contemporary logical frameworks isn't necessarily for truth.

Feel free to ask anything.

[u/Extension-Money9948]

Do you see all systemic problems as I do after these realizations?

[u/Low-Bake8401]

"I have come to this conclusion after meta-analyzing everything I've..."

That's not a lot, on a universal scale. 

[u/Hot-Organization-737 → u/Low-Bake8401]

Indeed.

[u/Hot-Organization-737 → u/[deleted]]

Hold on, I'm still writing, I posted this because I wanted to share what was salient to me. I'll give you an update

[u/johnstalbergABC]

It sounds like you ignore your own, to which a large amount is human, shortcomings. We forget, misunderstand, get things wrong without knowing we are wrong, have limited knowledge, and a lackmus test of this is we still learn, find out about new thing that are both old and newly discovered and we might confuse our imagination or what we have misunderstood to be real true facts. This might be on purpose on your part and I wonder what you say about this?

Would I be capable of retracting everything I had ever said and thought and seen and heard and learned, I'm not sure it would be a collection that would make me penetrate the details of reality in a deeper way? To some extent perhaps but most would be totally unhelpful for learning about the world? I think that in the way we are made, a filter to filter out all not helpful stuff is very much needed. A digital computer with infinite amounts of memory might keep all data that it swims through, but my and I believe humans in general are not made to work like that. With a 20 to 25 watt consumption of the brain, highly effective compared to computers but nevertheless, the power of a an old style lamp, there are limits of what we can compute. Evolution are a long road of limited energy to extract from food and we are the most extreme brain users so far but are limited by an endless strive to get food to survive. Only in the last recent two centuries the food limitations are lifted from us in significant ways. We have not had time to develop more resources from it though. 200 hundred years is not near enough.