6. Now, back to this physicist. I read through his work and it starts with the premise that space is ‘something’. That’s ok. That’s a fine premise. We don’t need to know how everything functions, only how we increase the precision of our present understanding (which is weak).
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-21 14:57:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429095372337647618
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1429095371079405577
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
5. Going through say, Langan’s theory of CTMU everything, it’s pretty obvious what he’s trying to do, and why, and when he’s making claims by analogy rather than causality or equality. “that doesn’t follow” is painfully easy. Its sophistry and theology with tacky math dressing.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1429095371079405577
Leave a Reply