Wikipedia:<quoted text>E=MC^2 is NOT a failed theory, nor a law, its an equation that has NEVER been disproven. Even the recent jubilation at CERN in which it was thought the equation did not account for neutrino loopholes was proven to be a technical error.

It was never designed to encompass the infinities of singularities, it is an equation for the atomic domain, the domain the atomic universe exists in.

There are similar equations for the quantum domain and until recently the two could never meet because of the infinities of those singularities

The mathematics of Dr Param Singh handles the infinities of both the atomic and quantum realms and ties them together in a way that allows scientists to think and work path those infinities to places they were unable to comprehend 2 years ago.

Please keep up if you want to attempt to discredit evidence.

But it appears that what you want is a piece of magic that works everywhere and every when and you believe no such magic exists so come to the obvious conclusion of the bronze age the hard of thinking and shout GODDIDIT

Let me assure you, science is working on such a unified theory and if/when there is a breakthrough the whole world will hear.

If anyone finds a case where all or part of a scientific theory is false, then that theory is either changed or thrown out.

A scientific theory in one branch of science must hold true in all of the other branches of science.

From Nova:

"For decades, every attempt to describe the force of gravity in the same language as the other forces—the language of quantum mechanics—has met with disaster

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: You try to put those two pieces of mathematics together, they do not coexist peacefully.

S. JAMES GATES, JR.: The laws of nature are supposed to apply everywhere. So if Einstein's laws are supposed to apply everywhere, and the laws of quantum mechanics are supposed to apply everywhere, well you can't have two separate everywheres.

Brian Green: In the years since, physics split into two separate camps: one that uses general relativity to study big and heavy objects, things like stars, galaxies and the universe as a whole.

..and another that uses quantum mechanics to study the tiniest of objects, like atoms and particles. This has been kind of like having two families that just cannot get along and never talk to each other...

There just seemed to be no way to combine quantum mechanics...

...and general relativity in a single theory that could describe the universe on all scales.

So here's the question: if you're trying to figure out what happens in the depths of a black hole, where an entire star is crushed to a tiny speck, do you use general relativity because the star is incredibly heavy or quantum mechanics because it's incredibly tiny?

Well, that's the problem. Since the center of a black hole is both tiny and heavy, you can't avoid using both theories at the same time. And when we try to put the two theories together in the realm of black holes, they conflict. It breaks down. They give nonsensical predictions. And the universe is not nonsensical; it's got to make sense.

71,401 - 71,420of 221,488 Comments Last updated9 hrs ago