Eric Weinstein is deeply disaffected from the academic community that provided his pedigree. He holds a PhD in mathematical physics from Harvard (1992). But he has never held an academic job, and has been working largely in isolation on the Big Enchilada, the Theory of Everything, the Unified Field Theory, the integration of quantum field theory with Einstein's theory of gravity that the biggest brains in physics have been try

::::::::

Eric Weinstein is deeply disaffected from the academic community that provided his pedigree. He holds a PhD in mathematical physics from Harvard (1992). But he has never held an academic job, and has been working largely in isolation on the Big Enchilada, the Theory of Everything, the Unified Field Theory, the integration of quantum field theory with Einstein's theory of gravity that the biggest brains in physics have been trying to crack for lo these last 80 years.

Last month, Weinstein came forward with details of his Geometric Unity theory. He claims that a 14-dimensional space naturally divides into the 4 dimensions that we all know and love plus 10 dimensions of spinors, which Paul Dirac identified 90 years ago as the appropriate wave function form for electrons and the other familiar particles.

I have a PhD in theoretical physics, but his presentation is way over my head. There are probably 20 or 30 elite physicists in the world who are qualified to judge whether Weinstein's theory is sound. All of them are already committed to one or another approach of their own. Where is the motivation for them to invest months studying and evaluating Geometric Unity, which comes from an outsider, and which is unlikely to enhance their own professional standing, no matter how the theory eventually fares?

Weinstein has claimed that academic science is populated by the most brilliant minds on the planet, but that their university culture is deeply troubled and unable to assimilate truly new ideas. He says that anyone whose thinking is radical enough to have a chance of solving fundamental new problems will not survive in today's academic environment. From my personal experience, I agree.

What I and many others find hard to understand and even suspicious is why Weinstein has not submitted a journal article so that his ideas can be evaluated through established channels?

Authors Bio:

Josh Mitteldorf, de-platformed senior editor at OpEdNews, blogs on aging at http://JoshMitteldorf.ScienceBlog.com. Read how to stay young at http://AgingAdvice.org.

Educated to be an astrophysicist, he has branched out from there to mathematical modeling in a variety of areas, including evolutionary ecology and economics. He has taught mathematics, statistics, and physics at several universities. He is an avid amateur pianist, and father of two adopted Chinese girls, now grown. He travels to Beijing each year to work with a lab studying the biology of aging. His book on the subject is "Cracking the Aging Code", http://tinyurl.com/y7yovp87.