The page should be kept for the reasons below:

->Dukwon 1) This theory is neither claimed to be "the best thing ever" nor "fringe theory". This was your own impression. It is only a different approach and mathematical formalism, and is capable of reproducing some useful results.

->Primefac 2) Naming references first as "red herrings" and then irrelevant does not explain how a theory should not work.

->Sławomir Biały 3) Calling the writing as an "eulogy of a non-notable academic" and referring to "walled-garden of non-notable Iranian scientists" is a very inappropriate means to evaluate a mathematical model. This is not the domain of politics, nationalism, or heroism. You may dislike the deceased author, or hate a nation, or tend to disregard your unfavored non-notables, for whatever reason you personally might have. But this is science based on clear mathematics. Better to check the derivation steps out yourself, and tell if calculations are wrong instead. The "only two" citations are quite correct as claimed.

->Steve 4) Answered in the above

-> Dilation 5) Is "Insufficient notability" how you deal with mathematics?

-> Bearian 6) Referring to the [3] on arxiv, it is actually falsifiable, and hence a valid scientific claim. There are some physical assumptions, mathematical derivations, and then predictions. Some predictions agree to within the accuracy of present-day experiments, some may not. Using "Not even wrong" is wrong here.


In summary

If anybody out there feels inconvenient about this theory and Wikipedia post, then it would be nice to disprove it mathematically through a fair scientific approach, than to humiliate and take prejudice in someone.

Start a discussion about improving the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theory of infinitely extended particles page

Start a discussion