The Final Theory - is this guy serious?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Physics Nut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Final Theory
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around Mark McCutcheon's "Final Theory," with participants questioning the seriousness and validity of his claims. The scope includes critiques of the theory's foundations, its implications for established physics, and the motivations behind its promotion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about McCutcheon's seriousness, suggesting he may be a charlatan or simply seeking attention.
  • Others challenge the validity of his claims, particularly regarding gravity and the work function, arguing that his interpretations are flawed.
  • One participant mentions that McCutcheon's theory posits that gravity does not exist and that atoms are expanding, which contradicts established physics.
  • Concerns are raised about the potential for misinformation and the financial motivations behind publishing such theories.
  • Some participants suggest that a petition could be created to stop the publication of what they consider a "crackpot theory," while others doubt its effectiveness.
  • A few participants propose that someone should read the book and provide a review to critically assess its claims, questioning the reluctance to engage with the material.
  • Humorous remarks are made regarding the perceived absurdity of McCutcheon's arguments, including references to high school physics and the simplicity of his claims.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity and seriousness of McCutcheon's theory, with multiple competing views on its implications and the motivations behind it. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the legitimacy of the theory and the appropriate response to it.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the accuracy of McCutcheon's claims and the implications for established scientific principles. There are references to the need for a deeper understanding of physics to fully engage with the arguments presented.

  • #31
arildno said:
Have you heard about a guy called Pratchett?
Send the 40 bucks to him, I'm sure he needs them.

He never said that the sky was octarine! Still, as a loyal fan, I'll send him the 40 bucks if I get it.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Y'know, I had a rather scathing reply typed out earlier on but I had canned it. Since you persist in baiting us, screw it, the gloves are off.

Ricardhheitman said:
I will pay 40 bucks of my hard earned for a fresh idea. I will pay you 40 bucks if you can come up with a fresh idea.

Such generosity. The quality or even validity of the idea is of no importance of course. With a flat rate of 40 bucks a pop, there's no sense in having standards, right?


I am amazed at the emotional energy level here. The definition of a sucker is someone who thinks there going to get something for nothing and ends up paying for it.

The definition of a fool is one who thinks he is paying for something of greater value than it holds.

This guy has written 600 pages of stuff , spent the money to bind a few thoudsand copies , create a website , find a publisher , get Amazon and whomever to put it on their site..

Yes, we all know the meticulous peer review process commercial books go through. The massive intellects and scrupulous intellectual integrity of big name publishers is legendary, no? And we all know that everything in print is the gospel truth, no? And authors who publish books hundreds of pages long are immediately worthy of our respect.

By the way, Mein Kampf was hundreds of pages long, and good old Adolf took the trouble to do that from prison by dictation. I wonder if that book's any good? It must be, by your criteria, right?

All of you think he should publish the paper for free. I disagree , much as I don't think the writer of a novel should give that away for free.

Believe me, my opinion of this book has nothing to do with what he's charging. I wouldn't read it if he offered it for free; heck I wouldn't read it if he paid me to do so. My time is too valuable to be wasted on tripe like that.

There are popular science books that do a fairly good job of conveying a more or less accurate picture of scientific principles and concepts. Those I support. This is NOT one of those.

By telling each other he is crazy and feeling good about him being stupid , you are precisely in the same mental and emotional place that the Spanish Inquisition was when it threatened to "purge" Leibniz for his theories. They were advised by the best ( meaning highest paid , most to lose) scientists of their time

So now he's of Leibniz's standard, is he? And we're a modern Inquisition, are we? :smile:

You can't critique what you have not read , and you can take snippets out of context and react only to those.

What I've read is enough to convince me it's not worth reading any more. Besides, even if I read the damned thing cover to cover, what would be the point? I bet you'd still be here accusing us either of a woeful lack of insight into his supposed genius or of wilfully perpetuating some sort of intellectual conspiracy to keep the free thinkers down. Wouldn't you? Be honest now.

FYI the author defended himself directly in this forum until the now closed thread of "ooh another Final Theory I believe. When he did so ( and the record is still available) there were very few actual challenges. He is also by the way a reasonably credentialed person.

I'm sure the Mentors have something to say about this thread they closed and their (educated, fairly trustworthy) opinion of it. And by what standard do you assess his credentials to be "reasonable"? In any case, scientists should care less about credentials than the worth of the ideas being put forth. There are some highly decorated crackpots out there.

Anyway, who am I to attempt to dissuade you? Please, go ahead, spend your presumably hard-earned money and your probably not-so-hard-earned time on procuring and reading this book. And while you're at it, order some Penta Water too, to keep you supernormally hydrated during your intellectual endeavor. That stuff's sold by crackpots and charlatans to gullible consumers, it should go nicely with this reading material.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Well , I should probably take my own advice and read the book before I seem to be promoting it which I am not.

I am promoting the idea of critical and intelligent review.That all

And no , I don't have time or inclination just to bait all of you into a time wasting exercise. While I am very fortuante in a relative way I still work 50- 60 hours a week.

What I will have to do is read the book , pick a part of it that is elf contained , and make believe I am someone else , bring it into the forum and ask for debate as if I were a high school sophmore. You could then illuminate the flaws with some rigor without feeling like you are wasting your time because its a good thing to straigthen out the drivel of sophmores looking for homeworK answers , but apparently not a good use of time to correct someone who ought to know better and went to the ffort to write 600 pages to debate you in earnest and in detail
 
  • #34
I'm embarrassed on behalf of PF. It amazes me that an obvious crackpot can have his own three-page advertisement right here in the middle of GD.
 
  • #35
Rach3 said:
I'm embarrassed on behalf of PF. It amazes me that an obvious crackpot can have his own three-page advertisement right here in the middle of GD.
I agree it's time to close down the circus. I don't think anyone here would be tempted to read something that the guy had to pay to get printed himself. :rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
8K