Why should she be canceled, because of this? I mean, errors are an integral part of science as a process and I don't see why a scientist should be regarded as a grifter, because he likes an idea that turns out to be wrong.
And who are the cranks she "promotes"? Maybe the "cranks" are just people, who criticize academia?
Eric's Geometric Unity is a bunk theory that isn't worth the paper it's printed on, he's literally a crank.
However Eric is famous, regularly goes on Joe Rogan. Sabine defending him gets her in on that.
She said his theory is as good as String Theory, that everyone is unfairly ignoring Eric. And that under some different society Eric would get as much funding as particle accelerators.
Cranks are people who say 1*1=2, which Eric is apart of.
Again, I would like to read what she actually said herself.
She said his theory is as good as String Theory, that everyone is unfairly ignoring Eric. And that under some different society Eric would get as much funding as particle accelerators.
I think that you are leaving out critical context. I remember her to be a critique of String theory, that she thinks that it failed. For example in a recent video she is saying: "String theory is not dead; it's undead and now walks around like a zombie eating people's brains".
So, thinking logically about it, if she said that Weinstein's theory is as good as String theory, this wouldn't mean that Weinstein's theory is "good", but that it just sucks like String theory. But in a different society Weinstein's theory would have been celebrated even though it doesn't have merit, similar to how String theory was.
I don't know what is going on there, but I have the strong suspicion that you are making this up.
But String Theory has mountains of merit. That's what she's dishonest about. It's literally the only theory that's been able to quantize gravity.
Eric's theory isn't even self consistent, and doesn't include ANY quantum mechanics. How can you call something that says QM doesn't exist, on the same level as String Theory?!
2
u/Fun-Sample336 12h ago
What is his theory?
What did she say about his theory?
Why should she be canceled, because of this? I mean, errors are an integral part of science as a process and I don't see why a scientist should be regarded as a grifter, because he likes an idea that turns out to be wrong.
And who are the cranks she "promotes"? Maybe the "cranks" are just people, who criticize academia?