Deletion of Doubling theory

Comment: speedy would ease the pain.  and completely non-notable one person's theory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Complete bollocks (WP:BOLLOCKS)

Comment: While this is still a relatively new theory, it appears to be more popular in France, where it originated, allegedly. A http://www.google.com/search?q=%22doubling+theory%22 Google search turns up ''several'' (not one, EMS) relevant hits: http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/servlet/GetabsServlet?prog=normal&id=APCPCS000839000001000236000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes American Institute of Physics, an http://www.bcs.org.uk/siggroup/cyber/abstracts05.htm British Computer Society, International Journal of Computing Anticipatory Systems (which gets plenty of http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=50&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=%22International+Journal+of+Computing+Anticipatory+Systems%22&btnG=Search Google Scholar hits, http://ermanometry.com/overview/ email from a French physicist, Xavier Hebras (http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=50&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=%22Xavier+Hebras%22&btnG=Search Google Scholar or Hebras Xavier, working with the same Phillipe Bobola--http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=50&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=%22Philippe+Bobola%22&btnG=Search Google Scholar--Malet is), who mentions a quantum physics "doubling theory" of time (in relation to ermanometry, financial market analysis by William Erman). Also, there are other doubling theories: morphology|morphological doubling theory (Sharon Inkelas), http://scholar.google.com/scholar?num=50&hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&safe=off&q=%22doubling+theory%22&btnG=Search etc (Google Scholar). Regardless of so-called "wide" scientific acceptance, this theory ''is'' notable. As far as Argyriou's biased "mystical nonsense", that isn't very |civil or neutral... It deserves an article as much as any conspiracy theory, spiritual idea, or philosophy does, at least
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Civility (WP:CIVIL)