I'm trying to publish this paper about a Quantum Gravity using the atomic nucleus, but by now the answer is it's controversial. What do you think? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371896737_The_Nuclear_Quantum_Gravity_Superconducting_Field_Theory_ToE
$\begingroup$ $\endgroup$
7 
New contributor
sergiopf is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering. Check out our Code of Conduct.
- 1$\begingroup$ AI is not capable of doing physics. Put down the LLM, pick up a textbook. Moreover, you have not actually presented a physical theory. It is a lot of math that looks like it is, and it is a lot of physics-y words, but you have not constructed an actual theory of anything, let alone quantum gravity. $\endgroup$controlgroup– controlgroup2025-11-23 21:27:21 +00:00Commented Nov 23 at 21:27
- $\begingroup$ I'm trying to publish this paper. The ResearchGate page says that you’ve already published it. $\endgroup$Ghoster– Ghoster2025-11-23 21:50:29 +00:00Commented Nov 23 at 21:50
- 2$\begingroup$ You put it on ResearchGate under Abstract Algebra > Algebra > Mathematics > Field Theory. Leaving aside the fact that this classification hierarchy makes no sense whatsoever, field theory in mathematics has nothing to do with the field theories that physics considers. $\endgroup$Ghoster– Ghoster2025-11-23 21:57:08 +00:00Commented Nov 23 at 21:57
- 1$\begingroup$ physics.stackexchange.com/help/gen-ai-policy $\endgroup$Ghoster– Ghoster2025-11-23 21:59:10 +00:00Commented Nov 23 at 21:59
- 1$\begingroup$ For further information on the community's attitude towards AI content, please see physics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/15065 and links therein. $\endgroup$PM 2Ring– PM 2Ring2025-11-24 00:03:15 +00:00Commented Nov 24 at 0:03
| Show 2 more comments