PrettyPebble

So far, all tests of the strand tangle model are positive. It agrees with all of textbook physics.

By the way, I offer an invitation to dinner to everybody who has a good argument for or against the theory of everything presented in the text.

Agree with all observations

The common constituents of space and particles must be extended, reach up to the cosmological horizon, and be of Planck radius.

This yields the modern version of Dirac's scissor trick and thus yields the Dirac equation. The constituents also yield the gauge interactions and the different elementary particles - all as observed. Also general relativity with the field equations arises. So it seems that all of nature is described with Dirac's idea.

Simple arguments, almost no math, lead to the common constituents of space and particles, and thus to the unified theory.

Based on Battey-Pratt and Racey, 1980. There seems to be no other visualization of wave functions in the research literature that agrees with observations.

Presents a way to picture how wave functions arise. Explains interference, entanglement, probabilities, and decoherence, as well as the Schrödinger equation and the Dirac equation.

Thank you. It seems that no other option except strands can explain both space and particles. It appears that a smallest length and a smallest area cannot arise in any other way.

The first half of the paper helps shortening your study of physics. (Generated many comments 8 months ago. I am the author.) The second, more daring half leads into modern research. Free preprint, comments and more at https://www.motionmountain.net/9lines Enjoy!

Maybe you have to shift a bit more ...

If you try to produce more power than c⁵/4G at a single point, a black hole horizon appears and will make exceeding the limit impossible.

In nature, the maximum power value c⁵/4G ≈ 9 ⋅ 10⁵¹ W cannot be exceeded, as stated by Sciama in 1973. Still not much known, the value limits the power of explosions, the luminosity of stars and that of merging black holes. It is also a simple summary of general relativity.

The 9 line summary is now also available as a preprint: https://www.motionmountain.net/9lines.pdf

More at https://www.motionmountain.net/onresearch.html

OK - taken out.

Thank you for your candid feedback. I belong to those working in physics for decades. To avoid such misunderstandings in future, I improved a few lines.

One remark: the text is really meant to state that the specific 9 lines given do contain all of physics (and thus all other natural sciences).

The argument differs from "words and Shakespeare": the nine line describe nature exactly, within measurement precision. That is the central content of that page. It is not that physics governs everything. It is that those specific 9 lines describe all measurements, all observations, and contain all equations. This is a much stronger statement.

No, I'm not. And reading the cited exchange is indeed useful to see this.

The topic here was that physics can be summed up in 9 lines.

Anonymous ad hominem arguments are worthless in this context - but obviously important to certain people.

In physics, experiments are everything. That is why the page says: "No known observation contradicts these nine lines."

Indeed, it is a sport to boil down everything to a smallest set of assumptions. That is how the nine lines arose.

In general relativity, space is not a thing.

With several recent PRDs.

Of course the 9 lines imply all of physics. Just mention a part of physics that is missing, and I'll buy you a beer.

"Zero entropy" is indeed against the laws of physics - in this universe. It may be different in other universes.

Line 2 does not speak about locality, but about the speed of light. Entanglement does not violate the speed of light - in this universe. It may be different in other universes.

If you know what a Lagrangian is - in quantum theory, in quantum field theory, in the standard model and in general relativity - you also know that there is no random interpretation in the 9 lines.

No - just a few weeks each, during your physics studies. And several lines can be learned in parallel.

No, it is fun! The scientists who are looking for exceptions to the standard model and to general relativity since 50 years are having a crisis at present, as often told.

The 9 lines imply all equations of physics. Every Lagrangian of physics is included. The lines are also coherent: none contradicts another. They are complementary: the cover all observations and all fields of physics. No field of physics is left out. The lines are also correct: every calculation fits with observations withing measurement accuracy, since the standard model (with neutrino masses and PMNS mixing) and general relativity exist.

If the 9 lines are wrong, just show it... Thousands of scientists are trying the same since 50 years.

See Physical Review D 104 (2021) 124079. Html page is updated.

And input and ouput devices ...