Plenty. As for some of the implications of completing the Standard Model and still not connecting particle physics with gravity, well...I hate to rerun my own material, but hey, why not?

Duct Tape Cosmology

For the last century (or so) the goal of physics has been to find an elegant solution which describes all of physics and unifies the four fundamental forces. Ideally, the result should fit on a T-shirt (like E = mc2). In other words, they work under the belief that their universe is not held together with duct tape.

Quantum theory makes predictions that have been confirmed by experiment to astonishing degrees of precision. Yet, there are still surprises - as Isador Rabi famously said about the discovery of the muon, "Who ordered that?". And some parameters of quantum theory still must be determined by experiment. For example, there is no theoretical basis for determining the mass of a particle - we know the mass of a proton because we measured it. Neutrinos were long believed to have no mass, but now there is evidence that that belief may be wrong.

Granted, progress has been made, with the electromagnetic and weak forces combined into the electroweak force in the Standard model. However, further attempts at unification have failed. And there is now some evidence that the unification points of the strong force with the weak force and the electromagnetic force might occur at different points. The implication of this is a) there is a significant problem with the standard model or b) the forces were never one force.

The theory of relativity, which is the current standard theory of the fourth force, gravity, also makes predictions which are confirmed by experiment to an astonishing degree of precision. However, this realm also has had its fifth force, sometimes simply called dark energy, and a new kind of matter, usually just called dark matter. I don't know about you, but those just sound like fancy names for duct tape to me.

Attempting to unify gravity with the other three (or is it four now?) forces has turned out to be a non-starter. The equations used in the two different theories, when combined, turn into nonsense, giving results like P = infinity (any probability > 1 is meaningless).

So, what are we left with? Well, we have theories that work extremely well, but they don't work together. Yet, when we look at the universe, they obviously do work together. There is a very real possibility that we live in a universe held together by (metaphorical) duct tape - a universe that did not begin as a unified whole.

This thought has wide-reaching implications, and not just for the careers of those who are trying to find a Grand Unified Theory.

Does the idea of an inelegant universe strengthen or weaken the idea of a universal creator?What are the implications for cosmology? Does this make it possible or even more impossible to find the ultimate origins of our universe? I think it's fairly obvious that multiple universes are implied by it - after all, those disparate elements had to come from somewhere.

Would the ultimate discovery of an inelegant universe affect the philosophy of science itself?

* I'm ignoring string theory for the moment, as it really hasn't reached the point of being useful to anybody.

It would be nice to find a magnetic monopole, wouldn't it?

Duct Tape Cosmology

You realize of course ( I know you do ) that elegance is in the eye of the beholder. The human body such as it is when one considers all the aspects including symmetry, visceral quality and general design ( or construct if you prefer ) is actually an ugly mess of smelly biomass systems that function rather sloppily together to produce a walking, talking entity we call man/woman. On the other hand it is a miracle of happy coincidences and organic successes that enables the identity of Joe Smith to reside in the physical realm of neural connectivity and electromagnetic impulses we call thought and then interact in a community sense with Bill Stevens and Jane Doe.

Hi Schad,Glad you left the string theory out.We must discover gravity waves or go back simply to the gravity is space time idea.

I'll settle for a cheap ozone machine myself.Should be rather simple to build?

There's already a theory of everything. It's called "averaging." Jeez.

Last I read, string theory was using 26 dimensions to duct tape the whole thing together. Bit excessive, that, but could turn out to be true.

I don't think an inelegant universe makes a case for or against an universal creator. Those who believe, believe. Those who don't believe, don't believe.

The idea of the multiverse is pretty well established at this point, particularly in regards to dark matter and energy. The problem with a GUT may be that there it can't be expressed without factoring in the other universes. Since we're stuck in this one (at least till someone actually crosses an event horizon, and then they ain't coming back) we may never be able to complete the theory. Other than by duct-taping some constants into the equation.

I don't see why the universe should necessarily be elegant. Life isn't elegant, why should the universe be so? Could be a cobbled together mishmash, a cosmic Rube Goldberg contraption. Newtonian physics works wonderfully in our frame of reference, but falls down on both a macro and micro level. Quantum theory explains some of it, relativity a bit more, string theory tries to tie it together (I didn't see that coming till I typed it).

Our universe could be on release 6.1.1.0 build 0007776_p. It won't all tie together properly till we stop running kernel386 in the backgound.

I think interquacking, autoleaving cosmic ducks will hold it all together until we find out something better.

Glad to see you're mentioning Dark Energy. There are those who are beginning to believe that the energy that pushes galaxies away from each other with greater force that gravity is pulling them together may be an electro-magnetic-like counter part to gravity called magneto-gravitation. It is a gravitational force (repellent?) that comes from the presence of mass and the motion of mass in an analogous way that magnetism comes from the presence and motion of charge.

The mass and motion could come from the galactic black holes at the centers of galaxies plus their rotation and the revolutions of the stars nearby. Cool stuff.

And here's another thing: Martin Tajmar of the European Space Agency has recreated a repulsive gravitational force in the lab by spinning a superconducting disk. But get this--the force is about 20 orders of magnitude greater than the "frame dragging" force predicted by Einstein and measured by Gravity Probe B of Stanford University (could have something to do with the use of a superconducting disk instead of an insulator or metal disk). This is a significant discovery and since it is far more powerful than expected and produced in a lab. . .it has engineering potential. A possible human benefit in years to come.

Science should have now demonstrated either

A. Divergence from the prospect of a Creator, or else

B. Convergence to the prospect of a Creator.

Given the extraordinarily large number of observations and facts with which we deal, the possibility of finding the exact zero midway between these two lines approaches zero, and should be disregarded.

Moreover, the evidence points quite strongly to the latter, the convergence.

Item: In a universe that somehow created itself, would we not expect simplicity - a simplicity that we should by now have unravelled? Not so. We cannot see the smallest things, nor the largest. This is no mere coincidence.

Item: The original scientific tenet, of an eternal, unchanging universe, has been upended. We now see that there was a moment of creation, just as stated in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the first book of the Holy Bible.

This is no mere coincidence.

As far as we look, and see, and understand, the horizon continues to recede from us. This is not because a universe sprang from a quantum fluctuation, and water dripping on rocks, resulting in human beings.

Not exactly original, nor correct.

for an accountant, this is good!

dude