Posted: Mar 09, 2011 12:39 pm
Thanks for the answer.
This seems to explain a lot, physicists basically know according to current paradigms that theories have to get more complicated with time and not simpler, therefore they think that theories like Jerome's is a waste of time to even consider.
I am not sure that I would agree on that theories necessarily have to get more complicated to eventually find the truth. I get that that is the common way of seeing things and that as you show it is the way it has happened before.
But I hope that one day the theory of everything explaining all observations perfectly will emerge and that it will be a really simple theory, probably thinking in a completely different way maybe using maths that are also completely new. Therefore I kind of like to read about these kinds of paradigm challenging theories.
But never mind what I hope for, you perfectly explained to me why these kinds of theories (Maybe with the exception of E8) don't get much attention.
Thanks
/Rickard
This seems to explain a lot, physicists basically know according to current paradigms that theories have to get more complicated with time and not simpler, therefore they think that theories like Jerome's is a waste of time to even consider.
I am not sure that I would agree on that theories necessarily have to get more complicated to eventually find the truth. I get that that is the common way of seeing things and that as you show it is the way it has happened before.
But I hope that one day the theory of everything explaining all observations perfectly will emerge and that it will be a really simple theory, probably thinking in a completely different way maybe using maths that are also completely new. Therefore I kind of like to read about these kinds of paradigm challenging theories.
But never mind what I hope for, you perfectly explained to me why these kinds of theories (Maybe with the exception of E8) don't get much attention.
Thanks
/Rickard