Dear Christian,
I appreciate you for offering your advice. There are many things that I have discovered that I have had to give a name in order to label it something different or unknown. Quite often I have used names that are most intuitive such as the Lorentz Mechanism for the Lorentz transformations giving rise to mass (replacing the incorrect hypothetical Higgs Mechanism). I believe that a discoverer of knowledge has a right to name their new equations. Often the Surname is applied or appended to the name of equations since they are often historically named after their discoverers. There are numerous examples of this such as Newton's Law, Maxwell's Equations, and even the Bohr Model itself is named after its creator Niels Bohr. I know from your standpoint you are saying that I am making a social or political faux pas and you are absolutely right. This reaction of your colleagues stems from human emotion such as jealousy, envy, greed, or perhaps even contempt or disdain for my success in Theoretical Physics. I'm not trying to win over anyone. I don't care about what people think in terms of fragile human emotion. I don't care about stepping on people's toes or being politically correct because those people are holding back the technological advancement of mankind by caring more about themselves than about the truth. I am in an intellectual battle with academics who are the closest thing to being my peers. For someone who possesses a natural God-given ability, I do seem to outperform those with much higher formal education. I know that the men who write the history books and physics textbooks (in whatever light they see fit) will have the final say as to what they call my equations, but they should respect the wishes of the great discoverers. I try to temper my fiery, redheaded arrogance but if I temper it too much then I bow to the whims of others and my strength and confidence suffer as my scientific works are dimenished in value. I march to the beat of my own drum. However, this trait is inherent in my genetics because psychologically I would be diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome (which comes from Neanderthal Neurobiology). That is why I don't place much value on human emotion but rather logic and reasoning. As a parent, I do place a much higher value on my son's emotions but obviously your colleagues are not my children (so I do not treat them as such). If your colleagues unjustly characterize me as a crackpot then it sounds like a personal problem on their part. I see that as unfair and biased because if I am mislabeled then how many others have been wrongly treated likewise that have come before me? I would rather stand up and change people's perceptions than let the world continue thinking in unrighteous ways. I am an intellectual leader, not a follower. You know, I am stuck in a socioeconomic class where I can't find a solution to go to college in order to get a degree in physics to gain credibility. However, I think that it is deplorable that I should even have to after what I have accomplished. I thought when I accomplished the Unified Field Equation that I would be recognized and receive something compensible to all the hard work and sacrifice that I put into solving the problem. However, I just see barriers placed against me. There is no natural limit to what I could achieve (save for resources, disability, or death) for the technological advancement of mankind if only my work was embraced and supported. I could model the Quantum Mechanics of the Equation of Everything within the next decade if I were given the chance. That isn't just a piece of mathematics on paper, it is a computer model that solves every single scientific problem in Physics, Chemistry, and Biology simultaneously. That is the ultimate goal that I am truly after because it is something absolutely within my intellectual reach. I am sure that you see what I see as the great potential of my mathematical work. First I model the Quantum Mechanics of a Hydrogen Atom, then all the atoms of the Periodic Table of Elements, next Molecules, and finally all chemical and biological Molecular Interactions. I am pursuing the Holy Grail of Science well beyond the Unified Field Equation. Who could legitimately stand-up against the Equation of Everything that successfully models every single interaction of matter? Who could oppose the correct Theory of Everything that is computer-modeled down to the Planck-Scale? The countries of the world have spent billions of dollars on particle accelerators (and yet somehow physicists still find a way to screw-up when it comes to understanding the true nature of the universe) when I could finish my amazing work much faster for a fraction of the cost!
Sincerely,
Stephen Tuck