The Scientific Holy Grail

For probably as long as humans have practiced religion, there have been those who oppose this practice.  Theism is only slightly older than atheism or perhaps it is the other way around.  For as long as I can remember, I have been fascinated by science, mostly physics and cosmology.  In my eighth grade science class, I had a teacher who introduced stories about Hindu cosmology which he attempted to connect to the cosmological theories of the time.  I found such ruminations fascinating and I was hooked.  There was only one problem with my decision to become a cosmologist or astrophysicist- Math!  Though I liked math well enough and had been very good at basic math in grade school, when I had to use formulas, the gig was up.  Still, I did advance to Calculus my senior year, though this only lasted a semester.  However, I never lost my curiosity and fascination with cosmology and the connection and relationship of religion to science.
The eminent evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould argued that there should not be too much of a connection.  He believed in separate spheres that he called non-overlapping magisteria, a wink at the Vatican and the Catholic Church.  It is believed that when the Pope is engaged in promulgating doctrine, he is infallible.  In general, the Pope has issued encyclicals, bulls, and other documents based on his teaching authority, known in Latin as the magisterium. For an atheist like Gould, he could see the usefulness of religion for believers, but did not see its usefulness in the promotion of science.
In this view, Gould recalls the view of Galileo, perhaps the best known Renaissance scientist who ran afoul of the Catholic Church and received condemnation and house arrest for his perceived arrogance and incorrect views.   Galileo too believed in the authority of the Bible and of the Church, but he had difficulty in compartmentalizing his faith and his science.  He supposedly said The Bible teachings you how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.
More recently the "New Atheists" have been far less sympathetic to religion, attacking it vociferously and mocking religious believers of all stripes, Christians and Muslims and everyone else in between.
Lisa Grunwald's 1991 novel, The Theory of Everything explores the terrain of science and its often tenuous relationship with religion in her debut novel. Even at the time of Grunwald's writing, there were religious believers and those who were not entirely dismissive of religion who were also prominent scientists.  Writers like Paul Davies who I first encountered in his 1983 work, God and the New Physics and who continued to write in this vein with The Mind of God (1992) and The Fifth Miracle (1998). John Polkinghorne is a prodigious author and former Cambridge physics professor and Anglican priest and others like the biologist A.R. Peacocke, Ian Barbour, and Father Stanley Jaki.
While many scientists are not religious believers, I believe they still cannot entirely dismiss the notion of faith, especially when it comes to their search for The Theory of Everything, the Holy Grail of Science.
The Theory of Everything also called the Grand Unified Theory is the attempt to unify gravity with the three non-gravitational forces the strong, weak, and electromagnetic forces.  It would be a combination of the theory of relativity with the quantum field theory.
In her novel, Lisa Grunwald introduces the main character Alexander Simon who is a brilliant physicist who is on the verge of developing this theory.  His quest is complicated by his relationship with his parents. His father, more of a scientist like his son, supports this quest by Alexander.  His mother abandoned his father and Alexander when he was a young boy.  She reemerges in Alexander's life right when he is so close to publishing his work.
The phrase opposites attract seems very apt for Alexander's parents as his more scientific father balances out the mother who is drawn to astrology, numerology, and other more esoteric areas of inquiry.  Through a series of events as Alexander tries to reconnect with his mother, Alexander himself abandons his work and goes in quest of enlightenment with a guru of sorts known as an adept who is also an intellectual and spiritual descendant of alchemists.  Alexander's adept is helping Alexander to find his own "prime matter", which can be about anything.
Alexander's choice complicates his relationship with Linda, the woman he is sharing an apartment with.  Alexander abandons her on his quest, leaving open the possibility he might never return from this quest and to Linda either.
The characters are well-drawn.  The plot is good.  Grunwald is adept at telling an intricate story.  I liked 90% of the book.  However, I found the ending to be quite disappointing.  While there is a resolution, I feel that Grunwald simply could not think of a great ending and the books limps along until its conclusion.
If you have in interest in astrology, alchemy, and related subjects, The Theory of Everything might be worth your while.