Can anyone disprove what this guy says? We might be doing science wrong apparently. Also, what the fuck are kozyrev mirrors?
Electric universe
Jacob Hughes
David Green
> Stephen J. Crothers (born 1957) is a handyman/gardener and part-time amateur scientist who claims that black holes do not exist, and are neither predicted by nor compatible with General Relativity.[2] His body of work consists primarily of articles that he posts at either viXra or his own personal website,[3][4] thus steering clear of the peer review process.
Dominic Roberts
I mean sure, if you want to discredit this guy's idea by simply calling his character into question that's one way.. but I think addressing the substance of what he's found seems rather important. Not to mention,
>Albert Einstein was a patent office clerk
Caleb Smith
Is this the guy who says stars don't burn, electromagnetism makes them switch on like light bulbs?
Dominic Mitchell
yes, he believes in a plasma model. have you ever measured a star extinguish?
Chase Flores
He's a quack with no formal physics nor math education spewing shit out of his ass.. what exactly is the 'substance' in what he has 'found'? Everything he says has been thoroughly discredited by any expert who bothers to read it
Here's a nobel laureate who bothered to read some of his claims
staff.science.uu.nl
Austin White
>Here are a few of the many schoolboy howlers from "the Miles Mathis of cosmology": Stephen J. Crothers:
>There has been a deliberate suppression of scientific truth by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole and the big bang.[4]
>There is no theoretical basis whatsoever for the existence of black holes.[22]
>Neither Newton's theory nor Einstein's theory predict black holes; both theories preclude it.[4]
>Black holes are the result of David Hilbert’s corruption of the so-called Schwarzschild solution.[4]
>Schwarzschild's "coordinate singularity" at r=2m is non-removable.[23]
>The Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates are just unmitigated rot; built upon a set of invalid assumptions.[24][25]
>The (Penrose-Hawking) singularity theorems are not theorems at all, as they are based upon false concepts.[26]
>It is possible to have M3 and E3 in one-to-one correspondence. [27][28][29]
>Einstein's gravitational waves are fictitious.[30]
>Einstein's pseudo-tensor is a meaningless concoction of mathematical symbols.[31]
>The Universe is not expanding.[4]
>The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is not cosmic in origin, it is produced by the Earth’s oceans.[32]
>The big bang is creationist claptrap.[33]
what did he mean by this?
Christian Cook
Current mathematical models are ridiculously good, and they assume the standard model of physics.
These guys are loons who don't do any math, and they won't be taken seriously in the least until they start doing math.
Jayden Gonzalez
>Can anyone disprove what this guy says?
no, but if you want ad hominen you've come to the right place
Cameron Flores
>These guys are loons who don't do any math, and they won't be taken seriously in the least until they start doing math.
but the guy in OP's video literally showed 4 proofs where he actually used mathematics
are you retarded? most people here just dismiss him because of what other "established scientists" have written about him without even looking at his stuff