It is supremely unhelpful when 1/3 or more of physics department tenure track positions are going to people who are not doing science, which is the present situ

It is supremely unhelpful when 1/3 or more of physics department tenure track positions are going to people who are not doing science, which is the present situation. As far as I am concerned, nobody needs a day job doing this sort of thing. It is recreational philosophical speculation, salted with mathematics. It would be far more productive to pay professors of physics to develop renormalization group theory for the game of go or something; at least that is testable, even if it isn't physics any more than the paper under discussion is. You apparently don't understand the difference between "you know, like all of Einstein's work" and nonsense like this. Virtually all of Einstein's work was based on experiment (he won the Nobel for explaining the photoelectric effect), and all of it was/is testable both in principle and in practice. The sort of wanking in this paper simply isn't science in any sense of the word. It isn't even testable in principle. It is no more science than a ghost story or a damp t-shirt with an equation on it.