Forces by Proxy: Exploring a New Theory of the 4 Fundamental Forces

[qedprigmosyno]

So there is a theory out there that seems to model the "four" fundamental forces based upon a higgs-like particle, which the author calls k-particles. He seems to believe that these particles act upon electrons, protons, fermions, etc. to produce forces by the means of k-particle density.
It's called forces by proxy and it's published online
[crackpot link deleted]

I was wondering what criticisms people would have for this theory. I'll be honest and say that this is a theory more appealing than string theory.

 

[Vanadium 50]

1) It's crackpottery. (Please note PF rules do not permit the discussion of crackpottery)

2) It's not even original crackpottery. The theory was first proposed in 1690.

 

[Entropia]

There are a few potential criticisms that could be raised about this theory:

1. Lack of evidence: The author's claims about k-particles and their role in producing the fundamental forces are not backed up by any experimental evidence or observations. Without empirical data to support their theory, it remains purely speculative and cannot be considered a valid scientific theory.

2. Inconsistency with established theories: The author's theory goes against established theories and principles in physics, such as the Standard Model and quantum mechanics. This raises questions about the validity and plausibility of their claims.

3. Lack of peer review: The fact that this theory is published online and not in a reputable scientific journal raises concerns about its credibility. Without undergoing peer review by other experts in the field, it cannot be considered a legitimate scientific theory.

4. Overcomplication: The author's theory introduces a new particle and complex mechanisms to explain the fundamental forces, which may be unnecessary and overly complicated. Occam's razor, a principle in science that favors simpler explanations, may be a criticism of this theory.

5. Lack of predictive power: A successful scientific theory should not only explain existing observations but also make predictions that can be tested and verified. The forces by proxy theory does not seem to make any specific predictions that can be tested, making it difficult to validate or refute.

In summary, while the forces by proxy theory may seem appealing on the surface, it lacks the necessary evidence, consistency, and peer review to be considered a legitimate scientific theory. It is important to approach such claims with skepticism and rely on established theories and empirical evidence in our understanding of the fundamental forces.