This paper had an Interest an Interest Score higher than 99% of items published in 2023 in ResearchGate, but for some reason I don't get recommendations (just lectures).
It explains dark matter, dark energy and gravity in first 6 pages and for kids, can someone tell me what's wrong with it?
Article Superconducting Field Theory (the Unification Theory)
@Preston Guynn thank you, constructive criticism.
At the beginning, many of the readings came from students, the most critical and the ones that gave me most headaches, but the ones that mostly shared it. These two lines are dedicated to them:
* The framework described here calculates the exact point at which quantum dynamics transforms into classical physic.
* Fig. 5 is the most important figure in the document; it must be understood in order to continue. It has been positioned horizontally to be more understable
Anyway it's a theory, is not tested, what I want is it to access in the academia to be studied. I'm not physicist nor writer, nor English to have a perfect translation, is just a concept, a system based on densities (between vacuum and matter to create gravity).
I've done some modification based in you complaints, but the theory is as it it.
The worst is about conclusions, you just need to take a book and look for each kind of vacuum, maybe I try to write a bit more, but it has already been written (I don't like to repeat myself):
- QCD vacuum
- QED Vacuum
- False vacuum decay
- Vacuum permeability, permittivity and polarization
- Vacuum zero state
- Vacuum fluctuations
- Some talk about the vacuum to explain cosmic inflation, subatomic particles speed, its energy, bla, bla...
The end is a shit, I need to extract and redirect all electromagnetism in the space, and causing it to not refill the space it has emptied, a completely shit in reallity (much more complex than expected)... I've some other ideas like a increasing electromagnetic screw with CERNs size... all shit!
Anyway I see you prefer hypercubes and neutrinos! Tell me a way to structure motion por atomic and subatomic particles.
Anyway people recommend my other papers which are preprints synchronized by ORCID. I didnt have to allow them access
The theory’s departure from extra dimensions and its vacuum-based approach are intriguing. However, scientific breakthroughs require rigorous scrutiny and validation.
The paper lacks empirical evidence or experimental results. Scientific theories must align with observations and experiments.
Peer Review: The absence of recommendations on platforms like ResearchGate could be due to limited peer review. Robust peer evaluation is crucial for scientific credibility.
While the paper claims to explain concepts for kids, it’s essential to assess whether it achieves this effectively. Simplifying complex ideas without sacrificing accuracy is challenging.
Sandeep Jaiswal If mine needs empirical evidence I want to see about neutrinos or axions. It's a good one (the best?), that's why I introduced the conclusions (weird, ok, tell me about neutrinos!), even the Higgs Bosson, what a fake...
About recommendations.
1. To read it is complex, too much shit
2. I created too much preprints and nowI don't know if it was a big mistake, anyway I will continue like this.
3. I've very fews reads from people registered in ResearchGate, that are the onescan recommend me?
I can't mention @Preston Guynn, I don't know it has broken his account or he has disabled notifications.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Filing