Theory Development rules

[elas]

Posts or threads of an overly speculative nature will be moved to the Theory Development subforum without notice,
. Users may not create threads in the Theory Development subforum.

This is a 'Catch 22' situation; I was awarded 7 points out of a maximum of 15, because I mentioned my theory on the 'Particles and atoms forum' etc, so the only way I can get my work on Theory Development is by accumulating warning points and even then it may closed done for being to speculative.

Its a good thing Einstein was not born today, as a failed student working as a clerk, his chances of getting 'Relativity' on Physics Forum would be zero.

Yet 'String Theory' which is pure mathematical speculation, it does not even come within the definition of the term 'science'; but, because it has professional backing, it is allowed not merely on Theory Development, but given its own forum.

How do Mentors determine what is speculative?

Lets have a debate on the rules please.

[elas]

It is most dissapointing to note that while mentors are prepared to engage in expressing their personal opinions on other forums, they are not prepared to get down to giving a reasoned reply to my question, or give references or quotations to support their claim that my proposed development theory is a 'crackpot' theory.

While waiting for a reply I have reread Stephens Hawkings definition of QT (he states it is all hypothetical) and his explanation of what constitutes a theory (nothing there that my theory does not match up to). Hawkings also outlines the need for a theory that converts QT hypothesis into QT non-hypothesis, which is exactly what I attempt to do. ( see "A Brief History of Time').

What Theory Development forum needs is free thinking mentors who are prepared to steer 'crackpots' back onto the straight and narrow path as defined by Hawkings and others and not ban subscribers on the grounds of their own personal bias.

[chroot]

We've gone through all this already. Give it up.

- Warren