On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 12:09 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:

> "A theory that can explain anything, fails to explain at all."
A few people on this list have repeated this sentiment, but I wonder if it
is really so.  If there were an oracle that could provide an explanation for
any question asked of it, should we conclude this oracle fails to explain
anything at all?  If not, then what is the difference between a theory that
could explain anything and an oracle that could explain anything?

Physicists spend their lives searching for a physical TOE that could in
principal explain anything that happens in this universe.  Is their search
in vain because this TOE would explain nothing at all?

A final thought, are theories that propose the existence of everything,
really theories that can explain anything?


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to