Little by little this theory is gaining some track. It is a humble, simple theory of everything..:)
Humble because it could had been created by a High-Schooler. Simple because it is really simple. It was developed using two dimensional cross-sections..:) One cannot simplify the Universe more than that... :) It is doesn't even require three-dimensional modeling..:)....mostly
It has strong points...mainly with respect to its conceptual framework. Even the fact that it was created using such a simplified framework brings up extremely deep questions. What seems to be a weakness is actually a tremendous strength.
For instance, in my theory, the dilaton field (which carries the only means of action-at-distance within the theory) decreases with the number of de Broglie cycles along a two-dimensional cross-section of a five dimensional spacetime manifold.
How can any theory based on this model be correct? Any previous theory always used the underlying hypothesis (not normally in an explicit form) that whatever is carrying action-at-distance effect, is spreading out on a expanding surface (expanding at the speed of light). That is a good idea, if one has a lot of photons, gravitinos, or whatever you are thinking to be the carrier of your force, that is, on average, the carrier of the action is distributed on a surface... but that doesn't mean that the basis of the theory should make use of this hypothesis. It conflict head-on with Relativity.
If you have a single photon being emitted, its absorption by a molecule, detector etc, in a location in the Universe collapses the wavefunction at infinite speed..:) - creating a real problem with Relativity.
It turned out that this is one of the important questions that only a very good Quantum Mechanics student would ask...:)
This simple example showcases hidden cracks on how we model interaction and hints that the normal modeling of energy distributed throughout sphero-radians or tridimensional or higher-order dimensional area is not a good idea. I developed a theory that works both with a single photon or dilaton or many...:) and reproduces the results we already have for a large number of photons without conceptual sacrifices.
There are other constraints that our Science have but doesn't know they are artificial.
As I mentioned in the post The Image in the Mirror
when I explained how time passes by..:)
Using the basic equation (Unification Equation) describing the displacement (x) traveled at each de Broglie stepwise expansion of the Universe, we showed that that displacement gets smaller and smaller as matter reaches closer and closer to the speed of light (45 degrees trajectory). This means that time passes by at the same speed. The effect of interaction gets smaller and smaller (as if the effective time were to slow down). In my theory, the effect of speed is not slowing down time, but it is implicit on the way matter (dilators) interact (through dilaton waves and the Quantum Lagrangian Principle). Just as a reminder, The Quantum Lagrangian Principle is the simple notion that any dilator moves such as always to be in phase with the local dilaton field.
This means that those considerations of infinite energy to make something travel at the speed of light might be unwarranted. If the acceleration is due to self-acceleration (propulsion traveling together with the rocket), then as velocity increases, the chemical, nuclear reactions taking place on the propulsion system would slow down and be actually less energetic...less effective in producing further acceleration. That wouldn't be the case under different conditions..:)
On the other hand, one should think along the lines of Voltage, Resistance and Current. Lets say that Resistance is equal to Inertial Mass. Voltage is equal to Force and Current is Velocity.
One can envision resonance conditions where the resistance goes to zero, as in a LC circuit. That would be equivalent as minimizing the inertia of matter. Remember, velocity in my theory corresponds to a deformation of the local metric (Strain). Force corresponds to Stress. Space is flexible so there is a frequency of resonance..:) One just has to handle space at that frequency to accelerate matter...:) Simple problem if you understand my theory..:)
Another unnecessary constraints we impose ourselves is the concept that losses are inherent in the acceleration of charged particles. That is the reason why we created such horrendously big particle accelerators. If you eliminate radiation losses, you could have the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) inside a briefcase..:) or a laptop...:) My theory sheds light on how to do that. Please feel free to ask questions.