One thing I have never really understood is why they are so vehemently
trying to find a "unified theory of everything".

  We have models which describe how things work at quantum scale, and we
have models which describe how things work at macroscale (including high
speeds and high masses). Neither model describes well the other, but why
is this such a big deal? Why can't we have two (or more) models at the
same time?

  This may be a far-fetched analogy, but we have theories and models of
how car engines should be built, and we have theories and models of how
skyscrapers should be built. Neither model can be used to describe the
other situation, but so what? That doesn't cause any problems. If you
are building a car engine, use the car engine model. If you are building
a skyscraper, use the skyscraper model. Where's the problem? Why would
we even need a "unified model" which describes both car engines and
skyscrapers at the same time? There's no need, and it would only completely
unnecessarily complicate things.

  Is it just a question of coolness, or is there some practical issue
in play here?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message