Alien Anomalies

Members Login
Post Info TOPIC: Miles Mathis has a Unified Field Theory


Status: Offline
Posts: 1
RE: Miles Mathis has a Unified Field Theory

Miles Mathis has proved a great disappointment. The first paper of his I read was the pi=4 and it really was ludicrous for both static and kinematic situations. I checked with some colleagues and they worked out to the same conclusions.I checked proofs others have done refuting the pi=4 notion and I agree with them.

It has been a decade since Mathis began plastering the internet with his theories and his "papers". He has appeared on numerous sites using aliases to defend his ideas, all with his trademark long-windedness and obnoxious personality undisguised. Pathetic, really.

The interest in anything Mathis has to say has largely evaporated. There has been little discussion of him since 2008. The inevitable decline comes from people having read and rejected his ideas with, at best, vague comments to the effect that" it is good to question and to investigate", etc. But it is more than that. Scientists and lay people  are truly put off by Mathis' arrogance and his constant self-promotion as a "Renaissance man" genius gifted in all fields when he is, frankly, not actually gifted in any of them. He is obviously lost as an amateur scientist, but he is also a  dreadful singer, a fair pianist, a poor writer, a vicious and jealousy-driven art critic, and a mediocre artist. He is a dabbler.

On his website Mathis posts bitter reviews criticising the paintings of artists much better than himself. His jealousy scarcely concealed. Even when supposedly praising an artist's work he ends up attacking it. For example Mathis once wrote eighty-one words of praise for an artist's painting and ended with one hundred seventy-seven words berating the painting's title.

Mathis' excesses have now come back to haunt him. He's rapidly aging. His YouTube site showing his studio, his singing, his piano playing, his holding dolls and imitating female yoga instructors, etc., has collected so many negative comments he disabled comments for all 37 of his videos. His paintings are not selling well ( unlike those of the artists he attacks) and seemingly most of the people he has known don't want anything more to do with him.

And on the subject of this alleged endorsement by Dr. T. Yaqoob of Mathis' Un-Unified Field book, Dr. Yaqoob never endorses any of Mathis' claims. He even clearly writes "I have not verified the results...". I find this suspicious since pi=4 would be a breeze for Dr. Yaqoob to prove or disprove and he does not even try. Why would he even put his name on this book without testing any of ideas within? Like most of Mathis'endeavors there is an air of illegitimacy about this book preface by Dr. Yaqoob that is hard to ignore.

I've given Mathis  fair consideration and I have to conclude he's way, way off.


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 305

I probably won't look at it - I'm still waiting for some things to be released - but I'm interested in how different it would have to be to be endorsed by a NASA scientist.  The theory sounds familiar.

What if Pinnochio says that his nose will grow longer?

Teaching the truth

Status: Offline
Posts: 1914

And a few other theories too. Sounds like some are similar to Eaol's favourite electric universe theory that he has explained to us here .

Some interesting reading and the new book has an endorsement from a NASA scientist. 

Miles Mathis - Two books and lots of theories



Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to

Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard