I'm not saying it is wrong, either. But it's not quantitative and makes weak predictions with very little work into the roadmap to experimentally validate the ideas.
>For scientists interested in citation
which is so pretentious and amateurish it's laughable. If the whole thing was written in the tone of "I'm an amateur and this is my pet theory" it would be fine, not interesting to me but whatever, fanfiction is a thing. If it was curious "could this be it?", sure. But it's pretending very much to be legitimate scientific work which is just strange behavior and it's pulling people in who don't know any better who are taking it seriously.
Intentionally fooling people for your own ego is gross.
It was a very interesting piece, and something to be proud of. So far nobody has figured out the TOE so they are in good company. On the other hand I see no reason for them to believe they are in a position to be as dismissive as they are of existing theory.
I don't know what that means.
It's describing an idea (poorly, imo). It's not a whitepaper. The blogpost isn't pretending to be anything but a blogpost. I'm not inclined to believe this has any more weight than any other random blogpost. It is a fun thought experiment.
> it's pulling people in who don't know any better who are taking it seriously.
This is one of the least important things to be concerned about.