4 ms·

Would you mind showing me the "wrong definition of a prime" in this manila envelope?

• DoctorOetker 8y ago
  I seriously do not understand why this question would be downvoted? It's almost as if your question is being interpreted as either: 1) as defense of the manila envelope (how is a question a defense?) 2) as indicating you are the author of the envelope (that probability would be incredibly low!) 3) as being written by the same author who made some other unliked comment in this topic (since when do we downvote all comments of an author as soon as we dislike one of his comments?)
  • Michael_Groom 8y ago
    The downvote means: "I cannot tell whats wrong with the theory b/c I didnt even read it. I don't know what a spinor is, nor am I familiar with the concept of point splitting. I dont even understand why the coupling constant is superfluous b/c I always thought the dimension of a spinor is -3/2 instead of -1/2." But downvoting in the first place seems reasonable. Not trying to attack the standard model here but rather showing interest in discussing a new approach.
    • deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    • perl4ever 8y ago
      I can't comment on advanced math, but there are a number of things that I do not associate with real scientific papers: 1. Not prepared with LaTeX. 2. Photo of the author. 3. Obsession with rounded rectangles and ovals. 4. It uses the word "colossal" 83 times and "rupture" 110 times. 5. Didn't see any references to other scientific works.
      • Michael_Groom 8y ago
        Well than these are the criteria you choose not giving it a shot, fair enough.