Unified Theory of Everything - Figured Out

In summary: Nobel Prize in Physics." It goes on to say that "I have recently discovered the fundamental principle of physics which will revolutionize the field." He "would like to nominate myself for that prize."In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of a single theory that could fit on a napkin or note card and how a non-scientist could have it tested by a legitimate scientist. The suggestion is made to submit it to a prestigious journal or contact a physics department. However, the conversation also acknowledges the potential for others to steal the idea and offers cautionary advice. Finally, humorous anecdotes about crackpot theories are shared.
  • #36
42.85 said:
A mispelled word! We got him now!
When are the mind games going to end and we will have some serious discussion?
P.S. The book on amazon is not for sale. The account was closed months ago. But you got me again, right?
This is for serious discussion, that's why your link was deleted, but I allowed your post to remain as an example of what is not accepted by serious scientists.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
42.85 said:
A mispelled word! We got him now!

Yes indeed!
 
  • #38
This thread is awesome. Just out of curiosity (For you forum vets), how many people have proven that P=NP over the years?
 
  • #39
abelgalois said:
This thread is awesome. Just out of curiosity (For you forum vets), how many people have proven that P=NP over the years?
I will prove it before i go to sleep.
 
  • #40
Jack21222 said:
I just find the irony delicious.

One can never have too much irony in one's diet. This instance tastes better than spinach.

abelgalois said:
how many people have proven that P=NP over the years?

Speaking as an alcoholic with a grade 9 math education, I can state definitively that P=beers/bathroom access.
 
  • #41
OMG, I was posting a quite lengthy reply, and because I took a while to make it, my session timed out, and I lost everything I wrote. How frustrating. Can I set my timeout limit on here, or is it set in stone?

I will know now to type elsewhere and copy and past when ready, but that is hugely inconvenient.
 
  • #42
itwillend said:
OMG, I was posting a quite lengthy reply, and because I took a while to make it, my session timed out, and I lost everything I wrote. How frustrating. Can I set my timeout limit on here, or is it set in stone?

I will know now to type elsewhere and copy and past when ready, but that is hugely inconvenient.

Yes, I know...it's happened to lots of people. I'm afraid it takes at least one experience like this to learn to either write your reply in a word processor or copy it before you click "Submit Reply" :frown:. At least, for long posts.
 
  • #43
itwillend said:
OMG, I was posting a quite lengthy reply, and because I took a while to make it, my session timed out, and I lost everything I wrote. How frustrating. Can I set my timeout limit on here, or is it set in stone?
I do not believe this can be changed

I will know now to type elsewhere and copy and past when ready, but that is hugely inconvenient.
Some people compose their longer posts externally. I just make it a habit to select all and copy just before submitting or previewing.

EDIT: Had this page open for too long before responding - lisab covered both of my suggestions.
 
  • #44
In Opera if I get back to the previous page forms are still filled - so I am not losing whatever I wrote.
 
  • #45
Borek said:
In Opera if I get back to the previous page forms are still filled - so I am not losing whatever I wrote.
Same with my browser (chrome) [if the message is long, I still select all/copy as well...].
 
  • #46
humanino said:
Same with my browser (chrome) [if the message is long, I still select all/copy as well...].

Roger that, although I'm using Safari. Back when I first joined PF, I was on Explorer (still on a Mac, of course, but before they had their own browser). I lost over 2 1/2 hours of composition due to the character limit. I can't say that it was anything important, but it did involve a lot of effort. I've always saved periodically during composition ever since. One of the things that I miss most about WordPerfect is that it automatically saved every 5 minutes.
 
  • #47
Danger said:
One of the things that I miss most about WordPerfect is that it automatically saved every 5 minutes.
Most present day word processors (Pages, Word, even Gmail) still do that.
 
  • #48
Gokul43201 said:
Most present day word processors (Pages, Word, even Gmail) still do that.

Hmmm... I was unaware of that. I have Word on 3 or 4 of my desk-top Macs and the Blueberry notebook, but haven't used it in at least a couple of years. (The versions that I have won't run on this Intel MacBook, and I can't afford to buy a new one.) Maybe they were saving so unobtrusively that I just didn't notice. I now use NeoOffice (open-source freebie). I'll take a closer look at it and see if it does the same.
 
  • #50
Hi,

I had a similar problem, so I will tell you what I did.

At many junctures during the development of my theory, I would copyright it. Each time I did it costs $35 and could be done online. While that is not perfect, at least I could prove my priority. At 3 junctures over 12 years I re-published the theory in a book. My latest book was completed Jan 2010 with CreateSpace, where the book was published free and is for sale at Amazon.com for anyone to buy and read. (Create Space is owned by Amazon.com)

While I would want to publish also in a scientific journal, I suspect none would accept it. As someone else here has said, "I have to low a profile for the magnitude of my claims." If you have questions email me.

Don Wortzman
[Note: posted email address deleted by moderator. Please use the forum's Private Message system to contact members privately.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #51
Wowzers! Thanks, Gokul. That's a very informative site.
 
  • #52
:)

so Newton's known for F=MA
and Einstein's known for E = MC^2

what will this person be known for ?
 
  • #53
U=B/T

Universe=biology divided by time

o_o
 
  • #54
Jack21222 said:
What's more likely? That you have a better understanding of physics than actual physicists? Or that you are misunderstanding something?

So are you implying that a person with no formal background isn't capable of achieving something?
 
  • #55
Jack21222 said:
What's more likely? That you have a better understanding of physics than actual physicists? Or that you are misunderstanding something?

Je m'appelle said:
So are you implying that a person with no formal background isn't capable of achieving something?

Wow. No. Not at all. He's suggesting that an uneducated person who finds himself in disagreement with literally all modern science is more likely to be wrong about something than he is to have had a brilliant insight.

Do you think that isn't right? Would you say it's 50/50?

EDIT: Whoops, this thread is super old.
 

Similar threads

Implications of a "theory of everything"
Replies
6
Views
1K
Where to Discuss a Unified Theory of Energy on Physics Forums?
Replies
2
Views
861
A Singularity structure being valid for all QFTs?
Replies
6
Views
476
Unified Theory & God: A Search for a Single Force?
Replies
33
Views
8K
Question about observation and the sense theory
Replies
16
Views
2K
Could a Theory of Everything Unlock New Technological Marvels?
Replies
20
Views
5K
I Is there a real need for a theory of everything (ToE)?
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Is a Unified Field Theory the Key to Understanding the Universe?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Theory of Everything (TOE) Without a Grand Unified Theory (GUT)
Replies
8
Views
3K
Discussion on the science-literature relationship and more
Replies
14
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top