XPost: sci.math   
   From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl   
      
   The Starmaker  wrote:   
      
   > 'The Theory of Everything is an overarching hypothetical framework   
   > that would explain the physics of the entire universe in a single   
   > equation. But unifying theories that define the large-scale   
   > cosmological structure of the universe with those that describe the   
   > minuscule quantum world of the subatomic particles has been a   
   > challenge for over a century.'   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > The key word here is... unifying.   
   >   
   > So, if energy is mass, and mass is energy...how come it's not called   
   > energymass? or massenergy??   
   >   
   > I mean, if you want to  unifying..then EM, not e=m.   
   >   
   > or energymass.   
   >   
   > Lets get this TOE started. Get it right!   
   >   
   >  explain the physics of the entire universe in a single equation.   
   >   
   > Is TOE a single equation of  the entire universe?   
   >   
   >  or an abbreviation?   
      
   So you misunderstood that too.   
   The problem is not putting everything in a single equation.   
   That is trivial, the 'Great Feynman Equation' for example will do.   
      
   The point is having no free parameters,   
      
   Jan   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)