Quote: "When I asked Weinstein for certain mathematical details about how he had arrived at the Seiberg-Witten equations, his vague responses led me to doubt hi

Quote: "When I asked Weinstein for certain mathematical details about how he had arrived at the Seiberg-Witten equations, his vague responses led me to doubt his claims."—and this is the crux I guess. There have been people who went unknown and unrecognized in their times, there have been theories that got laughed at before being confirmed. There are people who just dreamed up something with no real foundations or data to back up that later got vindicated. But likelihood was never in favor of grand theories being correct when not grounded solidly. I for one find Weinstein creepy and just downvote any Youtube suggestion that pops up in my stream. When someone like Roger Penrose comes up with a far-flung theory (multiverse, quantum foundations of consciousness, etcpp) at least you can be confident he has thought long and hard about what he's talking about (and tons of other stuff that does have standing). Not this guy. Weinstein makes a claim and when you ask for proof, he gets evasive, pointing fingers at people. I'm sorry sir but if you feel unjustly ostracized from the scientific community you still have to publish and discuss. If you don't we can know for pretty sure your exclusion was either self-induced or done for good reason. No research department benefits from a grifter. That said, I'd give him the benefit of a doubt. Many people seriously believe in counterfactual stuff as we now, sadly, know so much better than a mere twelve months ago.