Note that the majority of critics of the speedy neutrino hypothesis, including physicists, never really learned any quantum field theory.
Kea,What these authors and others have failed to see despite the brilliance of the insights is that this 26 (or 27 or 28 depending on the inclusion of centers) is a pattern that goes across all dimensions and the so called sub-spaces need not be zero. But from a more general view as this is a vague property of numbers too, as in my "Borg" theory- "resistance is futile" or it seems just as well to be irrelevant.The next level of such group considerations would of course be 81. It is not enough to show there are no "ghost like fields" or particles less than this Pythagorean grounding multi-brane three space centering to show if these are physical. And for the lack of your concerns of asymmetry of it all such static systems only seem to move at any speed. This is why these sort of brane theories like string ones have not pinned down the essential idea of mass or gravity.Each sub-region of the space has he pattern also and so on...The PeSla
Hi, ThePeSla. From personal memory, Physics was very dry back in the 70s. Another historical note for our readers: although evidence for quarks showed up in the late 60s, the 1990s form of the Standard Model was not established until the 70s. Until then, the seeds of string theory lay in another approach, to which the paper in this post belongs. String Theory went wrong as soon as it attempted to combine the successful quark physics with fragments of the old ideas, instead of thinking the older ideas through more carefully.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.