Something said by the late great physicist Paul Dirac has always sortta haunted me: “It is more important to have beauty in one’s equations than to have them fit experiment.”
+++++++++++
That is a really interesting comment. Being a kind person, I assume that Dirac didn’t believe that a pretty theory with pretty equations falsified by experiment had any value.
But in rejecting complex descriptions of the workings of nature I agree with his comment. Einstein didn’t sum an infinite trigonometric series to express the relationship between the speed of light, mass and energy. Somehow nature has conjured a way to express its behavior using various very simple combinations of mathematical symbols. Dirac wanted to find those symbols and the associated arrangement of those symbols that explain natural phenomena. An admiral goal.
Nature? No. God? Yes. I believe all the evidence supports a Creator, of which nature is but a part.
Interestingly, aspects of M-Theory hearken back to Hugh Everett’s “Many Worlds” interpretation of quantum mechanics of the mid-1950s in which “all” outcomes of events are realized, and are not simply chosen when the quantum wave function collapses and a specific outcome is realized.
If true, scaling energy downward to General Relativity - which would still be unified at a time lim=0 - should in consequence yield sets of circumstances in the macro as well. This could mean that when we die, however we die, our lives could continue in some other plane on which they have been playing out almost literally, eternally, with no break at all in the continuity of our lives, completely unaware of what had just transpired in that other plane of “this” existence.
...Except as a conjurer of ideas, such as I hope I can count myself. I don’t think God would mind. Hey, it’s just a hypothesis.
Though it does sort of gives a fresh perspective on the religious sense, here at least, of “eternal life”.
Best....