Totally not proof.

Even the article says that it's not really a theory yet, just more like an idea, and I agree. I kind of take issue with how a lot of theoretical physics is being run these days, where any old interesting and unique idea can be called a theory and then argued for/against as though there's any definitive and testable evidence either way.. ::sigh:: It's armchair science, not
science. It's good the article mentioned that it's not a theory yet.
It
would be fascinating if it could be proven, or if at the very least some actual evidence started appearing, but until it is, I won't subscribe to it.

The mere 'apparent graininess' of the universe is not what I consider actual evidence, merely an interesting phenomenon that we perhaps do not have equipment delicate enough to explore in depth. We have to remember, there was a time when atoms were considered the smallest things in the universe. When scientists say [or imply?] that the plank length is the smallest thing in the universe, I am not convinced. They even said in the article that this length is beyond the reach of any currently conceivable experiments. If all of this is beyond the capability of current experiments or technology, then it cannot be proven, and it can only remain an interesting idea. Nothing wrong with interesting ideas.

I just try not to believe in them too strongly, because they could collapse at any time.
Edit- Just before anyone gets on my case about my definition of theory, this is the one I am working with:
QuoteA scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
- US National Academy of Sciences
Quote
Hypothesis implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative explanation <a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs>. Theory implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth <the theory of evolution>.
-Merriam-Webster online dictionary
I would say, then, that this article is discussing a hypothesis, not a theory.