Physics and numbers other than one
Gideon Samid
Engineering Professor, PhD, 42 Granted Patents: cyber security, digital money, AI, chemistry, innovation science pioneer, innovation as a purpose and meaning.
How many types of forces move the universe? How many elementary particles are there? How many dimensions to the space we live in? Since the answer to all these questions is n where n is larger than one (n > 1) this answer raises a pesky follow up question: why not n+1, or perhaps n-1, or any other natural number? The arch achievement of modern science, as expressed by Laplace is: God has been dethroned. The universe was created without a creator. Humanly written natural laws are running the world. Much as in the pre-Judaic era where humanly created big statues were regarded as running the world.
?
The admission that a specific choice was made for the count of forces, the count of particles, and the count of dimensions, leads to the unspoken conclusion that these choices were chosen -- although science denies the existence of any agency that has the power to make these choices.
It is therefore that theoretical physics is frantically busy chasing a 'theory of everything' a super-string theory or anything of the like where the numbers that we regard as fundamental will be proven emerging from a deeper one-number only theory.
?Science obsessively guarding its "God is Dead" conclusion is turning a blind eye to challengers who claim that all of physics is a logical structure from human observations which cover only a fraction of the observable reality. We are limited on account of the process known as Darwinian Evolution. Our brain was evolved by responding to survival threats, anything else in reality that offered no threat to our Darwinian ancestors is completely disregarded. Very few physicists have the courage to let reason yank them out of 'we got it right'.
?