In Search of a Cyclops


How scientists look for a unified field theory but are actually looking to find god


In religion there are four possibilities available to us. The first one is that god exists, the second is that several/multiple gods exist, while the third one states that no god exists. The fourth option does not belong to the field of religion, but must be mentioned here nevertheless. Agnostics state that they do not know and cannot know about divine existence or divine absence.


In science there are fewer options. Either matter can be based on a unified field theory or matter cannot be based on a unified field theory. To make the missing option visible: in science one cannot state that matter does not exists. Matter exists. Period. And an agnostic would also look foolish when stating that one does not know nor cannot know about matter.


Obviously the instrument of freedom is that of religion. There is no evidence available that will deliver us the indication that there is only one god, that there are many gods, or no gods at all. And as long as we learn that we need to respect each others beliefs, we are just fine. In science we are definitively more restricted and the age old battle that existed between the many gods and the single god is now raging on the scientific level whether there is a unified field or not.


The most essential difference between the existence of a unified field and the lack thereof is the almost unscientific substance of nothing. Don’t get me wrong. Nothing is nothing no matter how many times you turn it around. And nothingness is nothing other than a fashionable word to say nothing. But the distinction between a unified field and a field without unification is just that. With a fundamental separation on the ultimate field, the separation, which is the nothing-in-common, takes center stage.


When nothing is just plain nothing, it should be possible to come to a unified field theory, a single platform on which all forces are somehow linked. But when nothing is a fundamental part in our existence, such platform cannot contain all forces in a unified way. Separation must then be part of the ultimate platform. This is not to say that cooperation is impossible – far from that – but it means that the forces are fundamentally different. Most forces may have something in common, but on the ultimate platform there should then be two forces that cannot be linked.


Some people have no problem to accept that men and women have nothing in common, but when it comes to a unified field theory a good number of scientists jumps on the band wagon to find that Cyclops. Is it the Christian, Muslim, and Jewish heritage that somehow makes us believe that if there is a single god, then the result of this single god must be singular also? If we cannot find a scientific trace of god, then why should we find a scientific trace of singularity?


Yet the opposite can be found. We can find mathematical evidence that nothing is a fundamental part of our universe. Through patterns found within the natural numbers, the number zero automatically pops up too. As soon as someone mentions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 a structure has been used in which zero has its own fundamental place. To find the mathematical evidence you can visit pentapublishing com. Naturally, zero and nothing are not one and the same, but the zeroes in 0019 do function precisely the same in that they could have been left out; they represent nothing.


Trying to find a Cyclops may have been fun in the old days. Today, we do not go for that anymore, but it is easy to lapse. Especially in science, we should be looking for factual evidence.