I've looked at a few candidates, and I personally think M-Theory has the best support, both theoretical and experimental, but I"m interested in what you guys have to say. Do we have any loop quantum gravitists here? Casual dynamic triangulists? Anyone have something else?
Thanks!

2453117 Most physicists share your view of M-theory. It already united 5 parallel theories into one theory. There is not much of experimental conformations, though. The scales of the theory are smaller than we can experiment on. It's mostly pure mathematics.

Personally I will wait for M-theory to make a prediction, that will later be found as true. Until that happens it's not really science. It's mathematics.

2453117
I'm writing a story partially named after it, so I certainly acknowledge its explanatory power, but if I were a bettin' man, I'd say we're not going to find any real unification with gravity because it's a thermodynamic illusion caused by the amount of information in a given space "holographically" projected onto the spherical volume around it, and since that surface area has to be disproportionately larger the more mass is inside to be represented, it just looks like spacetime is warping, because everything outside that volume "thinks" it must be smaller than it seems (assuming nothing's inside) and so bends closer.

If I had to guess, it's dark energy that's the "real" phenomenon, as the "remainder" from a conservation law required by the universe's prior flatness. I was talking to a guy from CERN about this, and he really liked the idea, but both of us were at a karaoke bar and kinda drunk.

I also have a huge physics boner for E8, as you can kinda see from the background my my avatar, so for aesthetic reasons I hope that theory's predictions of new particles pan out.
Quantum Dynamical Triangulation, also, I think, has some potential, since its explanatory framework overlaps a lot with the multiversal interpretations of quantum computer algorithms we already know work, like Shor's algorithm for factorization.