So we have explained entanglements, the new results from Cern showing strange effects in the vacuum as well as super positions, both in themselves and as spatial phenomena existing in two places simultaneously Farsight? Missed that one..

Don't think so myself, that I might give my idea a new name won't explain it. We are still building on our theories, and I'm sure that will continue when I'm dead and gone. Otherwise there wouldn't be all those arguments. And I agree JP, if you accept mathematics as a science with its own definitions of 'experimenting', and 'proofs'. Then it's as any other science.

My problem is with its 'universality', that it can find proofs for things we don't have, and never will, like parallel tracks always meeting at some point. I don't expect SpaceTime to do so myself, although it's possible to build a logical proof for it that is consistent. You can see that two ways, either they will exist, somewhere. Or math can prove things that doesn't necessary have to be true?

I don't know how to look at that one?

I'm too bad at math