Shortly after, the person messaged back with the expert’s opinion on my Unified Field Theory:
“There’s no innovation. It’s just rehashing relativity—endlessly circling back to it. All the formulas are borrowed from relativity and don’t go beyond its scope.”
“The formulas don’t fully break free from relativity’s framework; there’s no refreshing, eye-opening insight.”
In fact, while relativity overturned some of Newton’s conclusions, it also inherited core elements of Newtonian mechanics—it didn’t completely reject it. Similarly, the Unified Field Theory negates some of relativity’s conclusions while inheriting parts of it, not entirely dismissing relativity.
This expert seems to expect a completely new Unified Field Theory that throws out relativity entirely, which doesn’t align with objective reality. From Galileo to Newtonian mechanics, electromagnetism, relativity, and now the Unified Field Theory I’ve brought, these are all descriptions of the universe’s laws of motion. When later generations overturn earlier theories, it’s not a total rejection but a partial inheritance and partial negation.
If you propose a new physical theory today, you can’t entirely bypass relativity—just as relativity couldn’t fully sidestep Newtonian mechanics. If someone presents a new theory with no trace of relativity, completely unrelated to its mathematical formulas, I can confidently say that theory is wrong and worthless.