So what if..

[TinyTree]

So what if someone does develop a theory of everything. They work it all out, and spell it out in some web pages. They submit it for a refereed journal and it gets rejected for obviously spurious reasons. So what if they just forget about it for years, decades even? Just drop it?

Would they have an obligation to continue to grind away at the lack of apprehension of others, or would it be okay if they merely just wrapped it up, threw in the towel, and went on to the other things in life?

Would it really have mattered if Darwin's paper had been published in some obscure journal and then forgotten about for decades? That happened for Mendel, and in the long run his work was actually recognized- but would it even have mattered? Someone else would eventually have read it and then rediscovered it later, with a new set of words to describe the same thing.

What do you think.

[mkirkpatrick]

I agree absolutely with what you say. Much treasure lies buried in Plain-Sight,and we see it Not; sometimes our blindness and arrogance,coupled with concietful intentions keep us in the dark! Mans ability to delude himself,and hold on to old ideas, know no bounds.
regards michael.

[Guille]

Mike and TinyTree,

Are yoy talking about ethics? If so, neither of you, or me, or a priest, or any person or alien or whatever....is to say what should or shoudln't be done.

[michellemfry]

One can only present the truth as one knows it. It could be years before one theory evolves from many. I have never seen such an invitation to the party as I have with the TOE. It's like an invitation to the marraige supper of the Lamb. All are invited to participate. One and all are given opportunity like never before. Oh yeah, the bride is the TOE. She is to be dressed in fine white linen, etc. It's in a Book called Revelation. The little book open in the hand of the angel, also the TOE.

That's just a theory, though.

[Planet_Bob]

The main reason that the TOE - assuming that there really is only one - would be rejected for publication is because it would be bland. It would be so simple and obvious as to be relatively uninteresting to the majority of people.

If it doesn't contain the latest buzz words and exciting TLA's then it's hardly going to get people excited and if people won't get excited, then it's not really worth publishing.

Far better to publish the strangest, wackiest theories containing as many dimensions and universes as possible. Now that would get people interested and get the story sindicated to other publications.

What it all boils to is money and what makes good type.

After all, would the journals really publish the TOE if it was as simple as 1 + n != 1

[dleviwing]

Steve;
I am amazed at your sarcasm and pessimisms; Unfortunately I am inclined to share it.

[Planet_Bob]

Steve;
I am amazed at your sarcasm and pessimisms; Unfortunately I am inclined to share it.

At what point do we cease to be cynics and become realists ?

[dleviwing]

When it is realized to be true, of course.

[mkirkpatrick]

Mike and TinyTree,

Are yoy talking about ethics? If so, neither of you, or me, or a priest, or any person or alien or whatever....is to say what should or shoudln't be done.

Then why are you doing justthat amigo?




regards michael/

[crabby1]

many theorists were denied publishing of their mathematical only to be recognized later...............as in the case of string theory and gravitational unification .I think we are evolving thru life and death to reach the point of total understanding