Comparative analysis of spacetime theories reveals logical inconsistencies and proposes AI testing frameworks.
This paper objectively compares four mainstream higher-dimensional spacetime frameworks: string/superstring theory, M-theory, RS/ADD brane cosmology, and the PFUSRC 4D-based nested topological 11-dimensional model, focusing on their spacetime unification mechanisms, micro-macro scale transition approaches and multiverse generation logic. It neutrally sorts out the self-consistent internal logic of each theory and systematically analyzes their inherent theoretical and experimental bottlenecks, including untestable compactification schemes, unconfirmed supersymmetry, undetectable bulk space, and high paradigm transition costs respectively. From the perspectives of information theory and computational complexity, the paper further evaluates the autonomous self-consistent derivation efficiency of each theoretical framework under unrestricted AI reasoning conditions. The PFUSRC nested topological model features minimal primitive axioms (only existence and distinction), zero adjustable free parameters and full logical closed-loop derivation, enabling the fastest autonomous logical construction by AI without human parameter tuning. Finally, an open public proposal is released to deploy all spacetime theories on a unified AI derivation platform for blind testing of their self-derivation capacity, to provide a new auxiliary evaluation standard for fundamental spacetime physics research beyond traditional experimental verification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhenmin Wang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: