The Truth About Geometric Unity

Many of us read the recent Guardian articles by Marcus du Sautoy and Alok Jha that described a potential new 14D geometric theory of everything. Unlike most such theories, Geometric Unity has a unique experimental prediction that can verify it or rule it out. CERN is capable of making this measurement with existing equipment. The physics community has been unable to judge the claims directly since they are looking for papers by Weinstein, and there are none. In fact, the theory was developed by another author and Weinstein's contribution has been to popularize the ideas. If you are interested in the truth, I highly recommend reading the following links.

This article is non-mathematical and outlines the development and prominent features of Geometric Unity.
The Truth About Geometric Unity

This paper contains the mathematical breakthrough. A new interpretation of time leads to a connection between GR and QM. Einstein's equations and the fine structure constant derived from one simple principle.
Tempus Edax Rerum

The 14D geometric model is presented in detail. A flaw in the ADM positive-definiteness theorem is identified. A major outstanding issue in Kaluza theory is resolved.
Geometric Cosmology

The standard model of particle physics is shown to be a geometric property of the Geometric Unity cosmology. A unique experimental prediction is made.
Quantum Structure

The features of the theory are treated in a technical, yet qualitative way. A solution to dark energy is proposed.
Dark Energy in M-Theory

it is possible that you will not receive substantial interest in this thread.

therefore, I am posting in solidarity. I don't want a lack of replies to leave a bad taste in your mouth. I really appreciate these type of posts. good job. ATS needs more of this.

now, about the material ....I'm off to bed, but I've subscribed to take a look tomorrow.

thanks.

My response to this - Eric Weinstein, Jonathan Tooker, Marcus du Sautoy, Roger Penrose are all fakers and none of them are doing real physics. This is all pure math wankery which has little basis in physical reality.

Are you not bored of not getting real answers about how the universe works? There are alternatives, you know?

Many Scientists have been ridiculed due the idea that some explained it had nothing to with "physical reality."

Can you provide an appropriate critique that addresses the conflicts with the modeling offered, in relation to the models you believe in?

Any thoughts?

I think 'pure math wankery' pretty much sums up my critique. These same criticisms go back as far as the Copenhagen interpretation at least.

I'd suggest switching out as soon as someone tries to sell you something like '14 dimensional'. If you can't model it with 3 dimensions, you've lost the game.

The factor is generated by translation from one basis geometry to the next. As illustrated by equation (9),
we integrate from the present to future chiral innity, to past chiral innity and back to the present so that three
factors of appear. Before discussing 2we note a historical precedent for this process. In 10th century Baghdad it was recognized by Islamic scholars that at each step in time, a given system will be annihilated and then reformed in the advanced time state [6]. This is essentially the process defined in equation (9). Such things are beyond the scope of this article, but why did the Greeks have two words for time?

It is also worthwhile to note that 20 applica-tions of the operator Mto the state j i^will generate 13 powers of  giving a symmetry with the 20x13 Mayan Tzolkin.

If the engineering principles of time travel can be developed on MCM physics that may explain many historical anomalies.

Surely you jest.

Plz don't waste our time, OP. This is fantasy, not physics.