Abstract
I build a ``case for noteverything", with 3 levels of analysis. I first contemplate the complementary realms of ``faith" and ``science" and place the concept of ``theory of everything" firmly in the faith category. I then consider how ``mindsets of faith" affect scientific work, and compare the vast emptyness produced by the last few decades of the theory-of-everything fashion to the long list of wonderful discoveries produced by the ``noteverything mindset", which I illustrate through the examples of Planck's description of blackbody radiation, Einsten-deBroglie wave-particle duality and Fermi's powerful rudimentary theory of weak interactions. Finally I argue, of course less objectively, that even as a choice of faith the ``theory of everything" is rather awkward. A natural alternative is faith in a ``fairness principle", here proposed as a modern version of a principle first formulated by Kepler, which would imply that our journey of discovery of more and more things will not end or saturate.
Giovanni Amelino-Camelia