<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Theory of everything in physics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://theoryofeverything.eu/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu</link>
	<description>by Stanisław Mizerski</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2020 20:47:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.40</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Abstract by Stanisław Mizerski</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/abstract/#comment-17</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stanisław Mizerski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2020 20:47:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=34#comment-17</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank You for comment. I do not accept string theories. The reasons are in my work.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You for comment. I do not accept string theories. The reasons are in my work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Abstract by Brad Watson, Miami</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/abstract/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brad Watson, Miami]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:49:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=34#comment-16</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The theory of everything in physics is &#039;Unified Strings 21 or 19 (Dimensions &amp; Aspects of Spacetime)&#039; although it falls under thee theory of everything: GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4 (on Planet Nestor; see http://GOD704.fandom.com . 

This can be explained to a 5th grader, how about yours? GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4 covers every school on a university campus, how about yours? GOD=7_4 (and indirectly FOD=6_4 &amp; S=19 theory) was first observed by the ancients, how about yours? GOD=7_4 is thee Bible Code, how about yours?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The theory of everything in physics is &#8216;Unified Strings 21 or 19 (Dimensions &amp; Aspects of Spacetime)&#8217; although it falls under thee theory of everything: GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4 (on Planet Nestor; see <a href="http://GOD704.fandom.com" rel="nofollow">http://GOD704.fandom.com</a> . </p>
<p>This can be explained to a 5th grader, how about yours? GOD=7_4 or FOD=6_4 covers every school on a university campus, how about yours? GOD=7_4 (and indirectly FOD=6_4 &amp; S=19 theory) was first observed by the ancients, how about yours? GOD=7_4 is thee Bible Code, how about yours?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About me by Stanisław Mizerski</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/about-me/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stanisław Mizerski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Dec 2019 21:22:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?page_id=4#comment-15</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank You. I think that concept of time flow may be interesting in physics but it is not necessary because concepts of time and energy are sufficent]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You. I think that concept of time flow may be interesting in physics but it is not necessary because concepts of time and energy are sufficent</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About me by Salih Kırcalar</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/about-me/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Salih Kırcalar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Dec 2019 07:28:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?page_id=4#comment-14</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear Stanislaw,
Many thanks for your interest. I agree that relativity is only relatively true. I am deeply convinced that any formula reflects some laws of nature, or even philosophy of world order. The key point about the &#039;time flow&#039; formula is that consumed time in a physical process equals to the amount of energy of that process.
In the equation of time /time flow= energy, time is an interval like a road; time flow is like speed. Road is traveled only with speed and time is also consumed only with time flow. Therefore, increased time flow means decreased opportunity to utilize the time, and vice versa.
For further information about my theory please see &quot;Referee Letters&quot; section.
Best Regards
Salih]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Stanislaw,<br />
Many thanks for your interest. I agree that relativity is only relatively true. I am deeply convinced that any formula reflects some laws of nature, or even philosophy of world order. The key point about the &#8216;time flow&#8217; formula is that consumed time in a physical process equals to the amount of energy of that process.<br />
In the equation of time /time flow= energy, time is an interval like a road; time flow is like speed. Road is traveled only with speed and time is also consumed only with time flow. Therefore, increased time flow means decreased opportunity to utilize the time, and vice versa.<br />
For further information about my theory please see &#8220;Referee Letters&#8221; section.<br />
Best Regards<br />
Salih</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About me by Stanisław Mizerski</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/about-me/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stanisław Mizerski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2019 23:41:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?page_id=4#comment-13</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank You for comment. I think that relativity is only relatively true and does not agree with metaphysics.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You for comment. I think that relativity is only relatively true and does not agree with metaphysics.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About me by Salih Kırcalar</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/about-me/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Salih Kırcalar]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2019 15:00:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?page_id=4#comment-12</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John David Best has his web site Vida İnstitute. He put my articles page in &#039;Timeflow Theory&#039; &#039;http://vidainstitute.org/?page_id=656&#039;. Vida Institute is intersting site. And my web site is www.timeflow.org
In addition, 
I think that, my mathematical formula &#039;Time Flow&#039; explains mind with time relationship. Do I right ? Can you delve in this ?
In your opinion, discovery of a planet is more exciting. Or, as I&#039;ve presented in the attached article, whether observing &#039;A very tiniest mass in the space, having completed its life, have been turning into energy&#039; would be more exciting or not ? It is my belief that, this observation will be the proof of the General and the Special Theory of Relativity. This observation can be made only by NASA or ESA. I hope that I will be able to see this consequence while I&#039;m still alive.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John David Best has his web site Vida İnstitute. He put my articles page in &#8216;Timeflow Theory&#8217; &#8216;http://vidainstitute.org/?page_id=656&#8242;. Vida Institute is intersting site. And my web site is <a href="http://www.timeflow.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.timeflow.org</a><br />
In addition,<br />
I think that, my mathematical formula &#8216;Time Flow&#8217; explains mind with time relationship. Do I right ? Can you delve in this ?<br />
In your opinion, discovery of a planet is more exciting. Or, as I&#8217;ve presented in the attached article, whether observing &#8216;A very tiniest mass in the space, having completed its life, have been turning into energy&#8217; would be more exciting or not ? It is my belief that, this observation will be the proof of the General and the Special Theory of Relativity. This observation can be made only by NASA or ESA. I hope that I will be able to see this consequence while I&#8217;m still alive.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on String theories and others by Stanisław Mizerski</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/string-theories-and-others/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stanisław Mizerski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 May 2015 16:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=22#comment-11</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank You very much for comment. I would like to say that according to the Bible only one world (universe) was created. Only this world has existence and other worlds have not. It means that these worlds do not exist.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank You very much for comment. I would like to say that according to the Bible only one world (universe) was created. Only this world has existence and other worlds have not. It means that these worlds do not exist.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on String theories and others by Serghey Gherdjikov</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/string-theories-and-others/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Serghey Gherdjikov]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2015 06:19:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=22#comment-10</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is remarkable and powerful attempt to rethink and order all basic physical notions under metaphysical conception of Unity, and especially Love as a living principal of Universe. I am agree with many considerations here about nonsense and discrepancies in contemporary physics.  But I don&#039;t believe that metaphysics is so reliable source to deduce physics. We have and could have many different metaphysical systems.  Unity is good for our reason, but there is no guaranty that the world itself is One.  I see world as a phenomenal unity due to our human living body with specific senses and knowledge capacities.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is remarkable and powerful attempt to rethink and order all basic physical notions under metaphysical conception of Unity, and especially Love as a living principal of Universe. I am agree with many considerations here about nonsense and discrepancies in contemporary physics.  But I don&#8217;t believe that metaphysics is so reliable source to deduce physics. We have and could have many different metaphysical systems.  Unity is good for our reason, but there is no guaranty that the world itself is One.  I see world as a phenomenal unity due to our human living body with specific senses and knowledge capacities.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Other specific and important topics in the theory of everything by Stanisław Mizerski</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/other-specific-and-important-topics-in-the-theory-of-everything/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stanisław Mizerski]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2014 22:46:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=26#comment-9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you for comment. Quantum gravity is without sense.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for comment. Quantum gravity is without sense.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Other specific and important topics in the theory of everything by Satya Seshavatharam</title>
		<link>http://theoryofeverything.eu/other-specific-and-important-topics-in-the-theory-of-everything/#comment-8</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Satya Seshavatharam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2014 01:46:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://theoryofeverything.eu/?p=26#comment-8</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dear sir, I fully agree with your valuable opinion on Quantum gravity. One can find an excellent review on quantum gravity in the Wikipedia. Considering the subject of  black hole cosmology as a key branch of the quantum gravity, many fundamental issues of theoretical and observational cosmology can be understood.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear sir, I fully agree with your valuable opinion on Quantum gravity. One can find an excellent review on quantum gravity in the Wikipedia. Considering the subject of  black hole cosmology as a key branch of the quantum gravity, many fundamental issues of theoretical and observational cosmology can be understood.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
