I don't know much of Mathis. It is things like this quote that bother me. So they are calling it a messenger particle. That's just a label. He says its absurd. That's just a judgement. He is doing exactly what he accuses the physicists of doing. The main difference is that I can look up the data and experiments that led to the physicists conclusions. I can't look up what qualifies as absurd in Mathis mind or why. He can rail against mathematical fuzziness, but I have never known math to be fuzzy at all, and I have done quite a bit. I know of no real world application where the math and the reality differ.Well said, and I love Miles Mathis' take on this in his critique of String Theory.
More insights on maths at milesmathis.com.
Edit just noticed you mentioned Mathis in your later post. Personally I believe he's a gatekeeper/disinfo agent, but all of these people have to mix in a lot of truth as well. See this reddit comment on him.
That's my initial impression. Dang it, now I have to read his stuff to see if he brings any evidence for his labels and judgements.
I quit math for the very reason that I had progressed beyond anything that could be modeled in the real world. What on earth am I ever going to need differentials in eleven dimensions for?
I should have stuck with it, I hear there is a real shortage of physicists just now as the banks have been hiring them left and right. It seems it takes a particle physicists to figure out the derivatives market. Financial people don't have anywhere near the maths to even come close.
I watched the video, but not very closely. I don't think anything on there is gonna change any minds.
ETA - So I read some Mathis. Just reminded me why I never liked string theory in the first place. Perhaps his labels and judgements are well founded, still, Id prefer the facts, sans commentary. Tough to sell books or ads that way I guess.