ps you are an idiot…

it seems to me, without taking sides one way or the other as to the veracity of the theory being postulated, that if the reactionary remarks made by both the original poster/responder, and then by the scientist he references (without offering his/her identity) in objection to the e8 theory of everything by lisi are supposed to be examples of real scientific argument then i’m left out in the cold! if lisi is wrong, give me facts, not derisive sound-bites.

it sounds all too much like the scientists that used to argue so vehemently that rocks didn’t fall from the sky! their arguments were essentially circumscribed by ridicule… ridicule based on what was considered to be so self-evidently ‘obvious’.

hey, take out of any theory what you can/what works, and discard the rest. if it were to be found that there is nothing correct about his theory at all, but it is suggestive of other directions of thought/possibilities, then i say hooray! that’s advancement, and that’s TRUE science!

just my thoughts.

Abstracted from his Bio Data: http://sifter.org/~aglisi/Physics/CV.html

9/91-5/99 University of California, San Diego 5/99 Ph.D. in Physics G.P.A. – 3.9 Honors Fellowships – UC Regents fellowship, ARCS Foundation fellowship.

9/86-6/91 University of California, Los Angeles 6/91 B.S. in Physics and B.S. in Mathematics G.P.A. – 3.9 (4.0 in Physics and 4.0 in Mathematics) Academic Honors – Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma Pi Sigma, Golden Key. Graduation Honors – College Honors, Highest Honors in Physics, Highest Honors in Mathematics, Summa Cum Laude, Kinsey Prize for The Outstanding Graduating Senior in Physics.

So he may not be a scientist but must be have some intelligence.

The beauty of what he is proposing and what is getting some folks excited is that it is a simple theory. It unifies the gravity issue which has always been the biggest kink.

And the fact that Lubos doesn’t like it actually puts more merit in my eyes