A theory of everything: to blog, or to publish?

Update: I have published on this blog, read here.

I have been having a very difficult time recently, and I am not totally sure what to do? What do you suggest?
I have taken down my many entries on the fractal because I am afraid they will not stand as an official claim to knowledge.
Do I publish here on my own, using the low-cost technology of the web, or go through the usual costly slow peer review process?
The thing is, my discoveries with the fractal, have led me to - what I believe - a straightforward theory of Quantum Mechanics, or what might be called 'a theory of everything'.
When I listen to the 'experts' on the subject of quantum mechanics, it is as if they are speaking about the same things as I have discovered - but not yet published - in the fractal. Everything!: duality, uncertainty and entanglement, and even time and relativity included.

What am I to do?

I have been advised by a 'highly' academic colleague to write articles, publish them, and shut down my blog.

On the other hand, yesterday I discussed with another group of colleagues - and my students:
express myself through this blog, - I don't see anyone else out there with a similar theory, otherwise, we would know it - take my chances with it, use the new information technology we have.
Is a blog is a claim?

I am not in this for fame and fortune, I'm in it for the truth.



  1. After having a discussion with my academic collegues - e.g. fellow students - we have come to the conclusion that the way to go is to publish.
    Reach out your hand to the academic world and develop through the feedback, refine your theories and make an impression.
    The web can only get your findings so far and has a high probability to go unnoticed.
    Best of luck and warm greetings,
    Caroline Ehrlander

  2. You can not do both?

    The blog is a way to continue evolving your ideas and examining them from many different perspectives, as well as creating the possibility of others acting as a catalyst to expanding these perspectives in new and unexpected directions.

    Perhaps it has not been noticed by as many as you would have expected, but if you take it down the possibility of it having an influence in a dynamic and possibly even a viral fashion (juxtapose this with the possibility of a published work dying on the vine) is nil.

    Your thoughts already have influence on others, whether you are aware of it or not.

    If you're in it for the truth, then you already know what to do.

    Which system do you feel has more "infinite resolution", the peer review or the internet?

  3. Cheers friends. I have been thinking it over. I'm going to do both. I wrote this on my facebook yesterday: the dilemma I have is the extreme cost to publish - in both time and money. I'm looking to both blog, and to publish (on the new websites that have popped up to cater for these new demands). I just figure, if this is a new idea, let the new tech spread it. Peer review is stone age. Will someone take my ideas? One of the key insights from the fractal - I have found - is that 'knowledge' has, or must have, complexity: if someone takes my idea(s), they won't have 15 years of complexity/evolution - which incidentily, you are all part of. Richard Pearse (NZ's - and maybe the World's - first aviator) didn't have the internet. He told the wrong people -only his nabours - and was bypassed by history.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Natural fractal lake, Arethusa Pool, the worlds only?

Fractal Dimension, (Economic's) Elasticity and Complexity

ePublic Goods. Is the internet making new public goods?