wasn't referring to the content, but to the form. A lot of gibberish, claims of fundamentally new views and phenomena, and "presentation" of "ideas" on whichever forums you want except the ones really dedicated to such topics.
REP: Where are the relevant forums? Before I can publish I want to get some sound approval from the people in this group.I wish to convince members of this forum so that we can dedicate our finding to the world in a more consistent way. Obviously my contribution alone was not sufficient. It would not have been possible without discussion with you and Rose and everyone who asked me the right questions..
All the fundamental assumptions and related consequences can be discussed in a logical way.
=============================================
What the two guys did was exactly what you did. Boasted about their fundamentaly new results/ideeas in an incomprehensible manner to everyone but the colleagues and peers in the field (if they really are scientists). Which is exactly what you usually do.
REP: I am not a Scientist by Degree and my main aim has been to demonstrate the practical aspects of so called weird thinking.Yes I do agree that I should take it through a journal and for that I have already sent mails to Stephan Hawking and Brian Green for their remarks.And I do not mind if you wish to explore this idea on paper as some kind of collaboration between us.
=============================================
