Here is a link to the article in the Economist, and, of course, this is the shape that could explain the cosmos.
From the article:
“It is elegant. It is expected to make testable predictions. Unlike some of the more complicated efforts to devise a theory of everything, this one should either succeed relatively rapidly or fail spectacularly. And that is more than can be said for three decades of work by other physicists.”
That’s all that can be said for three decades of work by other physicists?
A theory should either succeed relatively rapidly or fail spectacularly?
chr1
Profrssor
This is not an advertisement, nor is it a waste of your time. Rather it is a valuable insight, very much related to your current research.
Due to personal limitations, it is difficult to comply with your submission requirements. Yet if you would take a look at my work and then if you are
interested in collaboration with me on a version of it. I will then make the effort to put it into a more acceptable format.
Please view the following web site.
http://www.scrollphysics.com/
Comment by Sol Solomon — October 4, 2008 @ 10:58 am |