Copy pasted from >>9966510
Has anyone here read the CTMU?
People discount it as garbage but have yet to give any valid criticism.
>In response to the only valid criticisms I've seen:
>muh neologisms
Langan has to invent words seeing as he's describing concepts that have never been thought of before.
>no maths
From what I understand his theory is entirely tautological and worked out without extensive equations.
>dismissed by modern science as a farce
He has this pretension that he's better than others and claims academia to be a club that he is not part of. In essence, he's blacklisted, so it's probable that if that were true, it has something to do with it. Seeing the modern academic circle jerk to be biased or exclusive to some degree, is not a new perspective.
Overall I would like to see someone offer valid criticism. You can download the entire thing on his megafoundation website by searching CTMU.
>Inb4: he's a pseud
Pic somewhat related
how about you summarize the paper so we can criticize the points you think it makes