In this closed question I was asking about particular claims made by a nonmainstream theory in the literature. I was asking about it since I didn't find much info about it elsewhere, so I wanted to know whether in the first place it is considered a "crank" theory, or just merely a minority opinion similar to Neo-Lorentz theory, Bohm's interpretation of QM, etc.

One of the reasons I chose the particular paper I did is, in addition to having the central claims I asked about, is because it also references most of the authors who have studied the theory, and you can see the journals they published in. This includes journals like Modern Phys, Modern Phys Letters, Foundations of Phys and General Relativity and Gravitation. I don't know if these are considered to be 'red flag' journals.

I'm rather new to SE so if there was something wrong with this question, or there is a way to improve it, I'd love to know. I removed one last question asking about the experimental part of the paper if that was part of the issue with the post.

  • $\begingroup$ the question is now deleted(or it's not there - can you post the contents of it or some snippet/ of it?) ; and I always type what you type (at the last section of this post) "point out errors or how to improve it"; good question too! $\endgroup$ Jan 12 at 13:15


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .