Look at what I found!!!!!

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 09:09 PM
link   
www.thefinaltheory.com...

The author of this site and book claims to have discovered the theory of everything... This is an outrageous claim!!!

Check it out!!! Especialy this part...

www.thefinaltheory.com...




posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Here are some reviews of the book...

prdownloads.sourceforget.net...

www.amazon.com...=1061950958/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-8324626-2873709?v=glance&s=books



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Very interesting. I love physics. I'd like to know exactly what this theory is now.



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 10:44 PM
link   
We'll just have to buy that book... And I have a burning feeling that it has something to do with chi/the ether/energy field/orgone...

[Edited on 27-8-2003 by TheBandit795]



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 10:59 PM
link   
if he has this scientific revolution thing why aren't atleast some people talking about it? i know it wouldn't be in the news but somewhere



posted on Aug, 26 2003 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Maybe they haven't caught up on it yet... Who knows... There are an immense amount of things that the media haven't caught up on yet...

Abovetopsecret.com isn't on cnn yet...


jra

posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 02:17 AM
link   
well he/she sure seems to want us to buy the book so we can see his/her amazing theories that solve all the mysteries... smells like it could be a scam to me.



Abovetopsecret.com isn't on cnn yet...


what reason could it ever have to be on cnn?



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 02:22 AM
link   
If it's a sound theory, you won't need to buy the book. It'll become mainstream science soon enough.



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Oooooookayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.......

Let's see.

Mccutcheon hasn't published any significant papers in astronomy, physics, chemistry, or mathematics journals. (or biology, anthropology, or any other -ology that I can see on a quick search.) No presentations have been made at symposia or conferences.

The "hot news articles" he cites about this problem are not from scientific journals -- they're from MSNBC and the like.

And now he knows how EVERYTHING works.

Uhm.... right. When he declares a revolutionary treatment for various ailments, remind me to not go to him for a medical consultation.




(I'm sorry, guys, but you really can't resolve the Grand Unified Theory of Everything without knowing about the maths behind it and chemistry and physics. I frankly couldn't tackle GUTheory because I can't do the math!)



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 12:39 PM
link   
You may be right Byrd...

But there is just one msnbc article and one from time. The rest linked to from the website are a.o. sciam, nature & newscientist.

Although it's kinda weird and also very unlikely that he really has discovered the theory of everything. I won't judge a book by it's cover... That's being closed minded.

Maybe it's the most accurate theory, an addition or just nothing... But the most extraordinary stuff do come from the most unusual places.



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I'm going to have to read that book. How can one man have figured out more than everybody else put together? He must be very smart. Or it's all claptrap, it's been done before.



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Yep... It's one of the two...

Either he's a genius with a breakthrough, or he's a ass with bull #...

[Edited on 27-8-2003 by TheBandit795]



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Oooooookayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy.......

Let's see.

Mccutcheon hasn't published any significant papers in astronomy, physics, chemistry, or mathematics journals. (or biology, anthropology, or any other -ology that I can see on a quick search.) No presentations have been made at symposia or conferences.

The "hot news articles" he cites about this problem are not from scientific journals -- they're from MSNBC and the like.

And now he knows how EVERYTHING works.

Uhm.... right. When he declares a revolutionary treatment for various ailments, remind me to not go to him for a medical consultation.




(I'm sorry, guys, but you really can't resolve the Grand Unified Theory of Everything without knowing about the maths behind it and chemistry and physics. I frankly couldn't tackle GUTheory because I can't do the math!)

Did you read page 2? He makes some very valid points about the inconsistencies of our accepted theories. There's plenty of room for someone to figure out something that makes more sense than what we have now. If anyone claims to have a better theory, and they appear to understand the dilemma, I'm interested in what they think they've discovered.



posted on Aug, 27 2003 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
But there is just one msnbc article and one from time. The rest linked to from the website are a.o. sciam, nature & newscientist.

Those are actually third and fourth level sources of information and will quote studies done elsewhere. If you're in college, hie thyself up to the library and ask to see the journals... that's where all the new stuff is published.

Or it's presented at a symposium (so it'll be published like that) or presented at a conference (and published in the conference "proceedings.") I'm not trying to be tacky, here, only educational. I'm getting several papers lined up for publication already, and I'm learning how this academic game is played. It's pretty brutal and very hard to get published like that. They stick you under a spotlight and people with a lot of degrees and lots of research will pick your papers apart.

I just had to rewrite one of my experimental design proposals, in fact, because the research idea was okay but it didn't have a properly "anthropological" slant.


But the most extraordinary stuff do come from the most unusual places.


True, but in the sciences (as someone has said) if this wonderful theory was true, you'd have professors (if it's an undergraduate) or teachers or colleagues writing about it already and promoting this guy's work.

The research I mentioned above is actually springboarding off another student's (as yet unpublished) doctoral dissertation -- but even though it's not published, his study has been published and talked about. The first thing that happens with a neat and "probably true" theory is that EVERYBODY wants to go play with it! The fact that nobody's playing with his theory is, as someone else pointed out, a pretty good indication that it's someone with no background and no real high-level understanding who has a Great Idea.



posted on Aug, 28 2003 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
True, but in the sciences (as someone has said) if this wonderful theory was true, you'd have professors (if it's an undergraduate) or teachers or colleagues writing about it already and promoting this guy's work.

Quite possibly, but in most cases, you'll find that they dismiss the biggest discoveries as BS, first. Luckily, no one gets burned at the stake now days.

My guess is, this is probably one of those theories that can't be proven nor disproven. That would explain the lack of recognition and/or Nobel Prizes.



posted on Aug, 28 2003 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Satyr
Luckily, no one gets burned at the stake now days.


we'll see about that lol



posted on Aug, 28 2003 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Byrd
Those are actually third and fourth level sources of information and will quote studies done elsewhere. If you're in college, hie thyself up to the library and ask to see the journals... that's where all the new stuff is published.



Yup I know that. I was shown that in the first few weeks of my old university...


True, but in the sciences (as someone has said) if this wonderful theory was true, you'd have professors (if it's an undergraduate) or teachers or colleagues writing about it already and promoting this guy's work.

The research I mentioned above is actually springboarding off another student's (as yet unpublished) doctoral dissertation -- but even though it's not published, his study has been published and talked about. The first thing that happens with a neat and "probably true" theory is that EVERYBODY wants to go play with it! The fact that nobody's playing with his theory is, as someone else pointed out, a pretty good indication that it's someone with no background and no real high-level understanding who has a Great Idea.


I've seen different situations where the scientists where not that openminded. There are still some who dismiss such things as consciousness studies...



posted on Sep, 9 2003 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Here's another one of those amazing sounding theories...

www.wddty.co.uk...

(Zero point energy field)



posted on Sep, 9 2003 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Amusing guy who claims to understand time travel and other spacetime things.

freespace.virgin.net...



posted on Sep, 9 2003 @ 01:21 PM
link   
I quit when I got to the Gravitational Prepetual Motion section. At this point the author makes a fatal flaw and I see no need to read further.


www.thefinaltheory.com...

There is no mystery here. According to current theory, the object oscillating in the tunnel through the earth would in fact have a decreasing amplitude as it emitted gravitational waves. Scientists are currently building very sensitive devices to attempt to detect gravitational waves produced by black holes and other massive objects.

A prepetual motion machine is a bit of a misnomer. The name is applied to a machine that continues to operate without external power forever, in the presence of friction, implying that the machine in some way produces enough power to overcome friction, in effect producing work.

Here's some more.....
ca.geocities.com...





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join