Interesting this essay. My english was very bad.Now it is not perfect but I evolve in this language.

Returning about this essay. The spin is essential !My model of spherization by quantum spheres , cosmological spheres inside an universal 3d sphere show us what is the rotation and its proportions with the mass. If you take my equations, mcosV and E=m(c³o³s³), you can see the propotions with the mass and the spinal rotations and orbital rotations.The most important is to understand that the mass and the light are the same in a pure BEC of the mind. The entanglement for the uniqueness is finite and precise.The volumes and the rotations take all their meaning.More a sphere turns , less is its mass logically speaking, that is why we can extrapolate and conclude that the universal sphere does not turn, so its mass is maximum. Now you can extrapolate with the fields of E and the other sense of rotation differenciating the mass and the light. The logic is respected when we consider that the libnearity is differenciated of the mass and its gravitational stability. If the volumes of the serie are not respected with its pure number, so we cannot quantize correctly this mass and the mass of the universal sphere, furthermore this universal sphere increases in mass so in E. Logically speaking, we have a finite number of photons inside the universal sphere. Now of course we can consider also that above this wall, this limit , we have an infinite light. The finite groups become an universal key for a real understanding of the evolution of this universal sphere.

If the volumes and the serie of uniquenss are well extrapolated, we can simulate all predictions!

This serie is the same relativistically speaking in the two scales, quantical or cosmological. Now of course, the groups are probably adapted to galaxies and their specificities but the serie is the same when we extrapolate by the mind. The rotations and the proportions with mass more the volumes.....imply a lot of things and dynamics.

Regards.

20 days later

Who knows what turned Mathis into the deluded blowhard and clown that he is today? Maybe his mother never potty trained him, and he is still wearing a diaper full of crap. And just like his diaper, his theories are also heaped full of crap. Having undergone the unpleasant task of wading through the longwinded and pompous musings that litter and pollute the Mathis website, I can offer this assessment: Mathis is a fraud and his theories are absurd and ridiculous. Case in point: pi equals 4.

You only assume the possibility that truth passes through three stages. The other possibility is of three stages that falsehood passes through. First, it is ridiculed by the wise, swallowed by the gullible. Second, it is violently opposed by the wise, energetically swallowed by the gullible. Third, it is accepted as being self evidently false.

Are we going to go change the textbooks, now that Mathis says they are wrong, and change pi into 4? I think not . Mathis is a crank. His theories, when not thoroughly of no real consequence, are wrong and his method of delivering them, on a cheesy 1990's wall-to-wall font website complete with insults about everyone from the President to NASA to CERN to professors to working scientists, is offensive. Mathis is going down and he has no one to blame but himself.

Why don't you and Mathis seek funds to conduct experiments. If Mathis can vanity publish two books he certainly had the money at one time. If all Mathis is going to do from now until he dies is write more papers he'll remain an obscure internet science amateur. Becoming more of a recluse than he already is will not be useful, unless he is now mentally unable to work with others. Maybe that's why he is holed up in a small New Mexico town known for its art when he's no longer producing any. Not looking good for Mathis, not good at all.

5 months later

Boys, boys, this is to judge hypothesis, not the people who created them. You can´t disprove just saying "it was created by a schizophrenic", you can disprove it finding an experimental contradiction. Since I couldn´t find by myself or in this thread that uncontrovertible counter-evidence I still give it the benefit of the doubt... Why nobody has proposed an experiment capable of falsifying straight away that crazy unified theory (on the other hand, no crazier than the most popular approach to quantum gravity (unification?) which, for instance, negates point particles and necessitates a new geometry yet not formulated)?