|A Google-generated definition of peace as freedom from disturbance or cessation from war or violence.|
Theories | Overview
In 1936, American historian Charles Beard, in his The Devil Theory of War, according to Morris Zucker, aimed to scorn the utopian forever peace theorists. 
In 1967, Norwegian sociologist Johan Galtung published his Theories of Peace: a Synthetic Approach to Peace Thinking, which presents the results of a year-long funded project to develop an “entropy/energy theory of peace”. 
In 1971, American writer John Garcia, in his The Moral Society, penned a Teilhardian-conceptualized theory wherein he theorized about peace entropically; the following being an example section: 
“The evolutionary force driving man toward ever-greater mind causes him to seek ever-greater awareness. The entropic force drives him toward matter and causes him to seek ever-greater peace and tranquility. Tension is produced by an unpredictable and uncontrollable environment. Man, in an effort to adjust to both the entropic and the evolutionary forces, relieves his tension by deluding himself into believing he is aware when he is not. He deliberately avoids the tension of the evolutionary force by destroying his feedback. Without feedback the game of life cannot be won.”
In 2012, American hobbyist researcher Kurt Johnson, curator of the newly-launched SocialOrganizationPhysics.com, was lecturing to local groups around the Chicagoland area on his “Physical Theory of Peace”, wherein he extolled his agenda-loaded view that physical sciences can be used to eliminate war and find sustainable peace.  The entire presentation, however, seems to be but a bloated diatribe on the motto that “if we can learn to fly” then “we can learn to eliminate war”, largely inspired by his hero English railroad and aeronautical engineer George Cayley (1773-1857), but little to do with actual “physics” other than superficial namesake.
The following are related quotes:
“The morning after Goethe's death, a deep desire seized me to look once again upon his earthly garment. His faithful servant, Frederick, opened for me the chamber in which he was laid out. Stretched upon his back, he reposed as if asleep; profound peace and security reigned in the features of his sublimely noble countenance. The mighty brow seemed yet to harbor thoughts. I wished for a lock of his hair; but reverence prevented me from cutting it off. The body lay naked, only wrapped in a white sheet; large pieces of ice had been placed near it, to keep it fresh as long as possible. Frederick drew aside the sheet, and I was astonished at the divine magnificence of the limbs. The breast was powerful, broad, and arched; the arms and thighs were elegant, and of the most perfect shape; nowhere, on the whole body, was there a trace of either fat or of leanness and decay. A perfect man lay in great beauty before me; and the rapture the sight caused me made me forget for a moment that the immortal spirit had left such an abode. I laid my hand on his heart – there was a deep silence – and I turned away to give free vent to my suppressed tears.”— Johann Eckermann (1832), day after Goethe’s reaction end (death) at age 82
“Elective Affinities—the famous novel by Goethe—is often considered, along with War and Peace [Tolstoy], the best novel of the nineteenth century.”— Francesca Santucci (2002) (Ѻ)
“Regarding the Dawkins scale I cannot easily place myself because I don't believe in a super natural entity that designed and created the universe so I would be a strict 7. However my theory that there is a natural arrow of time driving increasing order in the universe to a point where life becomes God like or my appropriately very stable (iron instability arrow of time). I do, however, still believe in the long term effect of the 2nd law. So in terms of the classical definition I am a strict 7. However I do think people are entitled to their belief as long as they are peaceful and respect others belief so perhaps that drops me to a < 6. It's very interesting, thanks for showing this to me. I used to be a strong 10 for fifteen years, but the effect of belief on human evolution and its production of scientific logic gave it some limited justification. I am actually an atheist. My philosophy on God is as described by yourself a response to free energy, so called islands of negative entropy and a 'future' evolutionary level of human consciousness not some unsupportable metaphysical entity.”— Mark Janes (2010), response to query (Ѻ) on Dawkins number
“The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren’t treated the way I was. Transgender needs to be taught about in schools, the earlier the better. My death needs to mean something.”
1. (a) Beard, Charles A. (1936). The Devil Theory of War: an Inquiry into the Nature of History and the Possibility of Keeping Out of War (pdf) (pg. 14). Vanguard Press.
(b) Zucker, Morris. (1945). The Philosophy of American History: The Historical Field Theory (pgs. 295, 298). Arnold-Howard Publishing Co.
2. Galtung, Johan. (1967). “Entropy and the General Theory of Peace”, Essays in Peace Research, Vol. 1, pgs. 47-75.
3. (a) Garcia, John D. (1971). The Moral Society: a Rational Alternative to Death (Chapter one: Section: The Step Beyond Man, pg. 13-; Entropy, pgs. 18, 33; Thermodynamics, pgs. 218, 309-10). Julian Press; The Moral Society (online). Publisher.
(b) Garcia, John. D. (1971). The Moral Society (online chapters). See.org.
(c) The Moral Society – Wikipedia.
4. (a) Home - SocialOrganizationPhysics.com.
(b) Johnson, Kurt. (2012). “A Physical Theory of Peace”, 2:52-hour talk, College of Complexes, Apr 7.
(c) Johnson, Kurt. (2012). “The Essential Physics of Humanity”, 2:52-hour talk, College of Complexes, Aug 25.
● Peace – Wikipedia.