It will hardly be possible to convince the world especially the established physicians generation to recognize the correctness of the solutions of my Unified Field Theory.

Here are the three articles:

1st About Oscillating Black Holes; 2nd About the new Protonneutrino; 3rd About the new Interpretation of Heisenberg's uncertainty relation

Much too much thinkers are convinced of their own exotic solutions - perhaps there are ten thousands of them, so that here may be a confused chaos of ideas.

I tried to study some of such exotic ideas which are published in the web, because they are ignored by the main stream physics.

The result is: I do not understand these strange derivations, and those publishers certainly wouldn't understand my derivations relatively strange, too.

How can you prove it? Theories find their correctness in the praxis.

I didn't write an exotic mathematic theory than more I solved the relativity theory deeper, I corrected the interpretations of the quantum theory. From this I created a complex solution which reflects the world in a unity. My assertions result which can be checked:

1. I predicted a new particle type: the proton neutrino, pair formation temperature: 248.5 K. Proof: The Casimir effect consists of pair formations and annihilations of these particle pairs because they are formed at -24,5° C and annihilated at -149° C. Between both values the play of the pairs is given, and there is no proof of Heisenberg's uncertainty or of virtual vacuum corpuscles! 
2. I predicted the antimass at the anti-particles like positrons and antiprotons. But it isn't provable at unstable particles like at mesons. You must examine these antiparticles which are called above. Indirect proof: Particle pairs compensate (annihilate) themselves to pure energy of radiation. This way the quality of gravitation disappears. Consequently, positive and negative gravitation should be compensated.
3. I predicted the discontinuity of the gravitation of the black holes, so that the total mass of a celestial body has to swell, which at least includes one oscillating black hole. Proof: The behavior of the pulsars. At their whole surface the radiation pulsates between the states: divergently closed or opened, but again on its way to be closed. It is improbable that there only is sent one pole-ray if one can discover many pulsars after supernovae - a pole ray only drives a ring but it does not reach the complete space.
4. I gave the basic law in opposition to the present opinion after which the unstable particles would lead to the beginning of all if one would find the most unstable corpuscle of them - the "original particle": The elementary of the stable particles. But I notice: All the unstable particles are descended of the stable particles. The decay exactly leads back to the identical stable particle which was destabilized before: This is the sentence of the conservation of the stable elementary particles. Indirect proof: The decay leads identically to just that stable particle which was destabilized before: Centence of conservation of stable elementary particles (leptons and baryons).
5. I predicted the existence of protocosms, which fast arise from collapses when they are packing masses and when they get lighter as a substructured package. Protocosms loose their external mass the more internal mass they pack. They zipp the mass then! While zipping in the computers, amounts of data will be packed to smaller values. As fast as protocosms are made they fall out of each other and re-zipp these masses which were packed before. Because the zipping masses and energies were ordered after the quantum laws, rotation systems of order get free while the re-zipping. You can examine this, if you will shoot the particles strongly together using particle accelerators that the so-called black holes would result. After the present opinion they had to exist a while and eat matter (today one thinks at cosmic periods until the black hole will burst). But I say: protocosms will be made by the crash in particle accelerators which will have a very short existence time. Then the protocosm will decay very fast. The decay speed can be calculated. At small black holes of this feature, the decay speed reaches to the smallest fractions of a second like well known of unstable particle decays. While its existence time, the protocosm is wandering away with next to light speed. The protocosm explodes at a different position. These processes are comparable because they are a unit! Indirect proof: After supernovae one finds new or young stars near this area.
6. If a mass free of electric charge is rotating or moving, then a gravitomagnetic wave is arising - consisting of the static gravitational field and of its movement in the shape of its gravitomagnet. This already EINSTEIN was able to derive. My theory consequently showed that between the electrodynamics and my gravitodynamics an absolute connection is given. Just one difference is valid: While in electric state the same polarizations are repulsing themselves, they are attracting themselves in gravitation. Following, you will some times prove at fast rotating masses that gravitomagnets of the same denominator will attract themselves. Indirect proof: All the planets rotate into one direction. Just like them, the suns rotate around the galaxy core. The gravitation magnets add themselves preferentially in the center of the orbits because the pole with a common denominator attract each other above and below their orbit areas.
7. I gave the theoretical explanation of the corpuscles: CORPUSCLES especially both the stable particles - protons and electrons - are spherically pulsating microcosms, therefore they are small bubbles which each are cosms themselves in a micro shape. Because of their oscillation, particles become to oscillators of spherical Tesla-waves. The exchange of the momenta by these waves makes the primary gravitation force between the particles. Here, I idealized them to Tesla-waves of spherical shape. Really, they are separated into both I called them: half a belly and half a back. Obviously, all the gravitational particles of normal matter each are couppled with their bellys and their backs from the beginning. Well known, you can't get vacuum light speed at the perimeter when the return of the coupling woud be possible. Because this is impossible, all the particles stay in gravitation to each other inside of their given momentum exchange. Proof: The gravitation acts monopolarly and all over as the electrostatics, too.
8. Consequently, anti-particles of anti-matter would be coupled with each other to be gravitational. It is logical that they should be repulsing against our normal matter. Indirect proof: The annihilation into energy.
9. I predict that electric charges are such a kind of elementary microcosms which are the smallest, but the strongest exchangers of energy of Tesla-waves. These mini-microcosms are cached in their gravitational microcosms of the stable particles. From there, they exchange their own wave structures of Tesla-waves (primary electromagentic longitudinal-waves). This way the electrostatic attraction and repulsion forces result. Obviously here the coupling of the bellys and the backs is primarily given in such a way that just backs and bellys make the attraction by contrasts, and the same wave-quanta lead to the repulsion. Indirect proof: The so-called "vacuum polarization of the electron". This is the measurement of a radius of about 10^-13 m where are innumerable positive and negative charges but only one charge of them makes the negative surplus. These are the internal protocosms of the electron. They discovered the real radius of the electron without knowing what they have done.