• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

202 submissions , 160 unreviewed
4,981 questions , 2,140 unanswered
5,340 answers , 22,629 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
813 active unimported users
More ...

  How can we test a theory of everything?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

Here are two possible, rather different, answers:

- Use the theory of everything (when a candidate appears) to calculate and then to measure deviations either form the standard model or from general relativity. Compare the results.

- Use the theory of everything (when a candidate appears) to calculate the constants of the standard model (the mass of the electron, 137.03, muon mass, quark masses), and compare the calculation results with measurements.

Which answer is more correct?

Which answer is more realistic?

Are there other answers?

asked Nov 19, 2019 in Chat by anonymous [ revision history ]
edited Dec 13, 2019

In order to formulate a theory of everything one must carry out the experiements of everything at least.

it's almost the 2nd answer. How it could be different? Basically, the theory must predict all the experiments outcomes, but not necessarily with the previous paradigms. In such theory, one can imagine that old constants lose a part of their meaning and that new constants appear; ideally, a set of the needed background pure math theories.

Now, for many aspects, the SM is a TOE. Thus, I think you are meaning a single small set of axioms from which all the sub theories can be derived without fundamental additions. Why does it exist and weither is it reachable today are open questions.

and if the universe (multiverse) is infinite, then there are quite a lot of experiments to be done... :-D


Every physicist knows that the "experiments of everything" have been done for many decades. The summaries of these experiments have names: they are called the standard model and general relativity. They are mentioned in the question. So the statement by Vladimir is not an answer at all.

I looked up Vladimir's comments and answers from the past. He always does the same: telling that the question makes no sense. 

@anonymous: Well, some people call me a "crackpot", so what? I am an independent and I hope I am quite reasonable. I do not extrapolate too far, unlike many others.

I do not care what others call you. I do not. I just find it very sad that you regularly tell others that questions make no sense. Why do you insist on demotivating people? Why can't you just read a question and either ignore it or answer it? If the same demotivation occurs inside your head, you will become very unhappy. 

The question makes perfect sense. It is simple and clear. The answer may be complex and hidden, true. Sabine Hossenfelder also explored the question. 

1 Answer

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

After asking everybody I know, here is a summary. The TOE can be tested in both ways: (1) by calculating and measuring deviations either form the standard model or from general relativity and (2) by calculating the constants of the standard model.

On (1). It is not sure that deviations occur. But if they do, fame and riches are waiting. 

About (2). It is sure that the constants need explanation. But we know the values already, so this option is boring.

It is best to follow both options, and hope that deviations are found.

answered Dec 15, 2019 by anonymous [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights