Until Zephir shows his calculations, AWT remains null and void, an invalid theory.
It's not the simple. The introductory postulates of AWT
are well known and defined. From this point of view, the introductory position of AWT
is much better, than the position of alternative theories, like the M-theory or LQG, when such postulates are defined in much more vague way. Such theories can claim virtually anything and so they cannot be even easily disproved.
The refutability is the important characteristic of scientific theory, the non refutable theories are just a hypothesis, no less, no more. So we can say, the AWT
is refutable theory at least, because it has very well defined the postulate base.
The another crucial point is, whether the AWT
is void and empty theory. I'm sure, it's not the true. The system of the introductory equations
is definitely solvable and it describes the undulations of the hypothetical string, the density of which is proportional the energy density in each moment and time location. The time evolution of such system was tested by numerical way in two dimensions and it is depicted to the animation bellow.
It's not clear, whether such solution has some physical meaning, but the system of these two equations definitely has mathematical meaning, so it can serve for predictions. From this point of view the AWT
is definitely not the void theory. It predicts something, we just don't know, whether the result can have some physical meaning - thats all.
The last stance, the AWT
is invalid theory is the most problematic one. In fact, it contradicts the stance, the AWT
is the void theory. If the AWT
would be a null theory, it cannot be wrong, of course - it would have simply no meaning. But as we know, the AWT
has a certain meaning, so it cannot be empty. But it can be wrong with the respect of point, it doesn't describe the physical reality. From such perspective is important, the AWT
is solely based onto equations, which are having a solid, robust and well proven physical meaning. The parallel solution of such equations should have some physical meaning too, at least at certain range - or something will be wrong with the whole physical formalism, which uses such extrapolations and combinations too.
So we cannot say, the AWT
is solely wrong, it can be just wrong outside the scope of validity of both the
equations. We should try the reason, why such equations cannot be combined at first to be able to postulate such claim.