Ho-Hum, Another Rejection

Just received a rejection letter from Classical and Quantum Gravity for a paper I had submitted called “Inflation, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy: A New Paradigm.” Not a new experience for me. The reason given was that “The manuscript displays a superficial understanding of fundamental physics.” This shouldn’t have been a surprise—I told them I’m an engineer. The evidence was that I asserted that quantum entities have to be either fermions or bosons without stating that this only applies in 3 + 1 dimensions. I admit I was ignorant of that qualification, but since spacetime does have three dimensions of space and one of time, not explicitly saying so had no effect on anything else in the paper. The reviewer had nothing to say about the actual content of the paper. Since the reputation of a respected journal can be ruined by publishing a crackpot theory, I suspect that the editors simply didn’t want to take a risk with my new paradigm but couldn’t find anything wrong with the physics, so they rejected the paper on the basis of the author’s qualifications. I understood this when I submitted the paper, so the rejection was no surprise. Maybe next time…

Gimme Predictions!

A question physicists always ask when someone pitches a new theory to them is, “What are some testable predictions of your theory?” If a theory doesn’t make testable predictions, they reject it immediately, unless it’s one of their own pet theories, such as string theory or the multiverse, both of which don’t make any predictions at all but are strongly supported anyway. Go figure. Anyhow, what are some predictions of the spacetime model featured in this blog?