emV000: Introduction to Ethereal Mechanics

There’s a fair few videos in it, but I was wondering if there was any merit to his idea or is he a bit of a Zarkov?

Couldn’t get the link to work, so no.

bob(from black rock) said:

Couldn’t get the link to work, so no.

Perhaps it should have been called Mollwumblefumblegumble bungle?

Worked for me.

I don’t know about the electrical stuff.

I had a look at video 14. He’s basically just saying that Newtonian gravity requires the gravitational interaction to be instantaneous. That’s well known, and is the basis of the original test for GR, which works without the instantaneous force transfer requirement.

So mostly a Zarkov I’d say.

> Mollwumblefumblegumble is this of interest?

No. Not in the slightest.

But since it may be of interest to some people I’ll start watching it.

Step one, in the first minute he misses the use of the scientific method. Every hypothesis needs to be tested.

He does NOT test the first hypothesis of a straight line by adding a new point. If he had done that then that would have eliminated either the straight line conjecture of the sinusoidal conjecture.

For example, general relativity has been tested at least fifteen times that I could easily list without trying, and there must be hundreds of tests that I don’t know of. Tests have been done in umpteen different ways to test each different part of the theory, and for each type of test the accuracy and resolution of the tests have been continually improved.

General Relativity has passed every single test. So it can and is accepted as correct.

Step two, he does NOT apply Occam’s Razor.

There are dozens of variants on General Relativity that contain free parameters, which if those free parameters are reduced to zero gives General Relativity. As the free parameters can be arbitrarily small, these variants can never be completely eliminated, except by Occam’s Razor. So these are not accepted until such a deviation from General Relativity is found.

Step three, in quantum mechanics (and to a lesser extent also in General Relativity, in the form of the Bianchi Identities), pure mathematics itself provides a remarkably stringent test of hypotheses. The number of mathematical theories that both explain the results and are mathematically self-contradictory is infinitely more than the number of hypotheses that explain the observed results and are mathematically self-consistent.

I don’t think I even need to watch further than 1 minute into the introduction. Correct me if I’m wrong.