In this paper we show that ${\cal N}={\bf R^3_{mnpq}}/4$, where ${\cal N}$ means the number of supersymmetries, {\bf R} means the curvature tensor, and $ means we don't know how to convert TeX back to ordinary text.That's not really what this paper is about, but we needed to pad out the abstract, since nowadays abstracts are longer than most introductions. That's because nobody reads papers anymore (unless someone tells them to). Unfortunately, we can't fit anything interesting into the Abstract, because arXiv.org refuses to let us include sound effects, movies, and odors.
In this paper we actually explain the title, authors, institution, and abstract. Next comes some propaganda about how exciting and wonderful some recent developments are. Then we ramble on about some other things bothering us, like why our papers don't get cited more often. (Hey, you know how to use URL's, don't you?) Then there's some physics in there somewhere. Finally, we conclude with an Appendix, Glossary, and References, since that's all that people read anyway (assuming they stayed awake through this Abstract).
Well, nice talking to you. Hope to see you again sometime. We'd like to stay and chat some more, but we have a paper to write. Bye for now.
This is not string theory's fault; high energy physics now takes a lot more energy than most people have. The real problem with string theory is that there is no alternative. However, the reason there is no alternative is that no one ever bothers to look for one; in fact, there is a strong resistance to even considering looking for one. Consequently, practically all theoretical high energy physics (and even most of phenomenology) is now string theory. Thus, string theory is not so much the Theory of Everything (since it explains nothing), but rather the "Everything of Theory", since it now encompasses all of theory. This era in string research is strongly reminiscent of the Dutch tulip trade just before the Tulip Crash of 1637.
The main reason string theory is incapable of explaining anything is that it has no predictive power. But even if it could predict anything, it would be only at the Planck scale, which is way beyond experiment of the foreseeable future. As a result, string theory has become boring. One solution might be to work on something that has more to do with observable energies. (E.g., some have proposed that the effective Planck scale might be at much larger distances, say, a micron. This would allow for accessible experimental predictions, such as gravitational collapse of microbes.)
We propose here a different alternative: Apply string theory to energies beyond the Planck scale, which are not observable even in principle. Then one avoids the objection of the untimeliness of string theory, since it never will be relevant, and thus one may as well work on it now as later.
It is now known for certain that both Taipei & Type B(eijing) superstrings are dual to M theory. However, we still do not have the slightest idea what M theory is.
Strings and Mballs 
Calculations in M theory require making Lorentz boots to the infinite momentum frame. Of course, Lorentz invariance means physics is the same in all frames, but at this speed we are too dizzy to reject handwaving arguments [we got tired of renumbering references, so guess].
The details of the calculations have been (/are being/will be) presented elsewhere; here we give cartoons. Since lattice QCD works in Euclidean space, we Wick rotate
The usual OscarWilderSchraeder conditions are then applied to preserve seepy tea invariance. Holography then follows from the mysterious relation
The continuum limit is ambiguous, as always, but we assume all variations of the theory are members of the same Univers(al)ity class. In any case, we hide such ambiguities by use of the subtlepoint approximation. Curvature is flattened by coupling it to the Frankensteinlin term, which scares away the ghost current.
Another advantage of branes is that the extra ones can account for the duck matter needed to explain the missing mass, as well as the duck tape (cosmic strings) that hold the compactified dimensions together. Of course, to account for the recent discovery of the nonvanishing cosmological constant, one needs the usual fine tuning to order yottayottayotta=10^{72}.
Every year asymptotic freedom is celebrated with the running of the couplings. 
and thus in fractal dimension D=4ε we have roughly
(in the case of asymptotic freedom). Thus, the Standard Model is dual to a model in 4ε dimensions, where the quantum running of the coupling in the Standard Model appears already classically in the latter model. Note that ε itself does not run, since
Of course, we introduce nonabelian fields for gluons because we want to gauge their reaction.
Similarly, in this new model there are "εscalars" that can take the place of Higgs fields, just as in monopole solutions of pure YangMills theory, where the time component of the 4vector potential acts as an adjoint Higgs. Since there are only ε of these Higgs's, the probability of their production is correspondingly reduced, explaining the Higgs's's apparent experimental absence.
This model is similar to the usual braneworld scenarios, with 2 important differences:
[1]  L. Lorenz, Spell my name right, Philos.Mag. 34 (1867) 287.  
[2]  Lawrence Sklar, I am not spinless, U of M (theory) preprint.  
[∞]  E. Soccerchief, D=10 is D=11, but N=3 is N=4, ν.φ. B52 (2002) 123.  
[0,1]  Eager Claponoff, d(brane)/dk, Plasma Physics Lab preprint.  
[q,p]  Enrico ("4") Fermi, A better length than Planck's, mylab preprint.  
◻  Bare Einstein, Moldy Cheeses, and Horseshoe Nasty, pp waves and poopoo waves, disgusting preprint.  
[1'] 
