The principle of science, the test of all knowledge is experiment, experiment is the sole judge of scientific “truth.”
Where does the experiment idea originate from in the first place? The experiment itself helps us to produce laws that we can add a quantifiable measurement too, but also needed is imagination to create these experiments in the origination of the idea. These great visualisations are to take a logical guess at the wonderful unique workings of a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end. A particular end aimed at finding a conclusion by experiment and unifying the process by the function of maths.
What is a theory of everything? The theory of everything is to unify all universal processes into a single manifold, a collection of points forming a certain kind of set of physics that fully explains and links together all physical aspects of the universe. One may argue that a theory of everything is based on history so far and a theory of everything so far, as the future is not yet written. One could also argue that a theory of everything is not possible because we simply do not know everything.
Why do we not know everything? You would think with the large amount of money spent on science research that science would know everything, however this is not the case and by no means is science to blame or can it be said that money buys discovery. The scientist simply needs funding for equipment to proceed to experiment of the rational thought out assumptions made, that are discussed with colleagues . There is also a hinder-hence of the universe is simply large relative to us, our observation range has boundaries and we can only guess and make assumptions of what? if anything? is beyond those boundaries, leaving unanswered questions without experimental facts and functional maths.
If we have visual boundaries and do not know that what is there after these boundaries, does this relatively mean that religion as has much premise for argument with that which is there after? Yes, as the present information of science stands and being limited by observation boundaries, no one can answer for a certainty what is out there beyond our limitation of an imaginary wall which marks the limits of a volume of space, a dividing line created by matter observation and trying to put a shape to an otherwise shapeless space.
How will it be possible to logically guess a theory of everything? To understand this, we would firstly need to be clear on our understanding of the definition of ”everything”. The functional use of maths can only explain and express process, maths can not explain ”everything” on itself, maths does not explain us, maths can not explain the unseen. To clearly understand ”everything” is to look back in ”time”, to gather information and to make a logical judgement about the true value of something. A fundamental breakdown of everything. To ask questions of physical values and to consider values that do not physically exist , to fundamentally explore the universe looking to link all singularities into ”one big picture”. To understand ”everything” we need to know how things work, to understand universal ”laws” and to make logical comparisons of axiom values to conclude the what’s? and if’s? of the unseen universe. We also need to be sure of what we mean when we say ”universe”, a definition that describes all that is contained within our visual universal boundary, space and matter being defined presently by a single classification of a universe.