[font="arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif"][quote name='taby']
Yes that's right, I have an oversized ego because I call out liars who pretend to know more than they actually do. I'm not ashamed. Let me know if you're also interested in the personal tutorial on QG / LQG.
Perhaps if Human Resource, forsandifs, Peter Woit, and Lee Smolin hadn't always lied or been so negatively critical of the extremely hard work put in by string theorists for no good reason whatsoever, I would have responded more positively. Once a hater always a hater, I guess. I'm not ashamed of attacking such people. What's really funny is that their defense is always "why are you so mean to other people"? ROFLMAOBBQ.
[/quote]
Oh, I've got absolutely nothing against string theory, unless it condones your Q-continuum behavior. So far, string theory has given no tangible evidence whatsoever, only a lot of untested jibber jabber. I wonder what would Pauli have to say on all this... I am quite certain that he would take the stance of people like Woit, Smolin and Krauss. Science has been and always will be based on empirical evidence. You can bash all you want, but all you've got is some cute math with little or no verifiable evidence.
It's not even wrong.[/font]
If you are serious about your claims, you are going to stop insulting other people, acquire some sensibility and learn about social protocols... Then you are going to take your work and prove it. If string theory indeed works, alright, awesome. The first order of business for you is to learn how to differentiate mathematics and physics. Contrary to your belief, they do not map one to one.
And if you'd stop being an utter, egoistic asshole for one second, you'd realize that scientists have no secret agendas towards "hiding the truth", lying or any other way someone would classify steering away from the truth.
It is possible that you are smarter than all the scientists in the world of modern physics.
But you see, there is a strict difference between possibility and likelihood. Thus, yes, you being the ultimate overlord of science *is* a possibility, but the *likelihood* of that happening is approximately equal to the chance of a big fat midget, having impregnated a gorilla with an alien's fetus, getting enticed to destroy Earth and humanity for their possible, but unlikely future interference in the offspring's development.
But, seriously, I think you are the David Icke of physics!
The most important thing you should take home from this post is there are no liars in science at large, just decent people fascinated by the Universe we inhabit. Science should be skeptical and science should be rational. Everything is subject to scrutiny. But it's all directed towards giving us a chance of better understanding the Universe. Thus said, if you are going to be a stupid egoistic asshole for the rest of your life... Then I honestly feel sorry for you.
You know what would I like? Exotic matter! But that's just the cruelty of math playing with my space-faring trekkie heart. Such matter has never been observed thus far, it's just a consequence of mathematics and theoretical possibility. You don't see me getting angry at everyone because I believe ( I don't, I agree with them ) they are mistaken about that observing such properties is
highly unlikely.
ROFLMAOBBQ only proves that you are a childish 14-year old trolling from his mum's basement. Anything else would be just sad. How about you finish school (if you are not a dropout), get a degree in physics and battle those "liars" face to face. It's easy to play overlord with a bunch of game developers who emulate matter with triangles.
Now, what is more likely? Everyone is lying and you are the last beacon of truth... Or the other way around?
