Garrett Lisi, surfer and creator of possible theories of everything, has given a TED talk:
I had never thought to put Schrodinger into the box.
"I try to balance my life between physics, love, and surfing. That way even if the physics I work on comes to nothing, I've lived a good life." Word.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The search for a Theory of Everything, which is kind of the unofficial M.O. of the scientific establishment, has always been closely guarded. The elements of profound uncertainty involved with such a quest have always primly clipped, safe from the grubby hands of untrained speculation. Relatively…
The blogosphere is a-twitter over surfer dude paper modestly titled An Exceptionally Simple Theory of Everything by Garrett Lisi
Just maybe he is onto something, but it is way overhyped
And so it is.
Lisi's homepage (currently severly slashdotted) and wiki
There is extensive discussion at…
In the latest issue of Outside Magazine, I profile Clay Marzo, a rising star on the pro surfing circuit. In December 2007, Clay was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, a mild form of autism. What's so intriguing about Clay's story is that his Asperger's isn't a hindrance or handicap. Instead, it's…
I need to preface this entry by saying two things. First, I'm no quantum physicist. This is intended to be an introduction for the lay reader. Readers who are well versed in particle physics will no doubt be alarmed by my reductionism. So be it. You have to start somewhere. I would encourage those…
The idea is to think outside the box and in the box at the sane time.
Just from seeing people mention his theory of everything, I get the sense that some people think he's making complicated stuff too simple. Does anyone know enough about this to really explain why some physicists dislike his idea/approach so much?
I thought his model was pretty thoroughly debunked? That he was doing things like ignoring vectors? Now I hear he's been going around giving lectures and has funding from Templeton... what's going on?
This is actually a serious question - I'd like to know if there's still some reason for his theory to be taken seriously.
the first example of the Schrodinger cat thinking outside the box (sorry, I could not help it)
I don't know about his theory, but I really like his approach to life. Balance is something a lot of physics geeks don't have and sorely need. I also like the fact he is an independent researcher instead of playing within the system. Not saying people shouldn't be in academia but academics can be major snobs.
Hey academics are elitists, not snobs :)
Anon: ignoring vectors, you are probably thinking about the discussion of "adding" bosons and fermions. But yes there are problems: for example http://golem.ph.utexas.edu/~distler/blog/archives/001505.html
Perhaps if you object to the Templeton foundation you should send a donation to him :)
Helpful link! Thanks Dave!