back
1 comments
The authors of this article are "semantic jockeys." First, they define a "theory of everything" as a theory that will unify disparate theories of physics. Then, further down, they define "theory of everything" as "one complete and consistent set of fundamental laws of nature that explain every aspect of reality."

Unifying 3 inconsistent domains of academic physics; and explaining "every aspect of reality" are two different things.

The authors use their authority as academic physicists to corrupt our everyday language. They have no credibility as scientists.