Almost all of modern physics is divorced from actual reality despite claims to the opposite.
The fundamental nature of Reality
Physicists repeatedly claim physics as a description of the very fundamental nature of reality and indeed the literature of physics is replete with ‘fundamental’ constants, forces and principles. We are therefore justified in criticising it on these grounds.
Newton’s gravity
Newton’s theory of gravity is a form of ‘action at a distance’ according to both Newton and Einstein. We are entitled to reject it on these grounds alone.
It cannot explain perihelion precession or eclipse effects (Van Flandern)
Density as an alternative
Nonsense. Density is a scalar value – it has no direction. All objects fall to Earth at the same rate regardless of density. There is no empirical relationship between density and acceleration. Density has nothing to do with gravitational attraction.
What about mass?
Mass is a scalar value – it has no direction. All objects fall to Earth at the same rate regardless of their mass. There is no empirical relationship between mass and acceleration. Passive gravitational mass has nothing to do with gravitational attraction. Gravity debunked
Newton’s bucket
The experiment of Newton’s bucket is of paramount importance. An absolute frame of reference for acceleration and rotation has not been determined and so ‘all’ physical sciences are without a solid foundation.
Einstein’s relativity
Einstein did not solve the problem of Newton’s bucket, but without a frame of reference, velocity, acceleration and hence gravity are undefined. Therefore all downstream theory is invalid.
Quantum physics and gravity
The science of QM is held to be the most thoroughly tested model of reality that we have and yet it does not describe gravity at all. It cannot cope with a phenomenon that occupies 100% of the known universe.
Quantum physics and linearity
Quantum physics and linearity
Quantum physics describes the world as a linear superposition of ‘states’. Each state is the solution to a linear equation. Therefore expect a linear reality but instead see non-linearity everywhere.
This is grounds enough to reject the entire theory.
Quantum slit detector
Particles are said to behave differently if a ‘detector’ is present. There is no record of an experiment with any ‘detector’ that does not significantly alter the physical processes of the set up.
This is a hoax.
The Shnoll effect
Radioactive decay is described as being of ‘random’ origin but Simon Shnoll showed that rates of decay demonstrated both lunar and seasonal cycles.
This directly contradicts the prevailing quantum explanation.
Foucault’s pendulum
A swinging pendulum is claimed to prove that the Earth is round and that it is spinning relative to ‘absolute space’. No credible, reproducible instance of this experiment with suitable control can be found.
This is a hoax.
https://library-of-atlantis.com/2025/10/30/gravity-as-an-inertial-field/
The behaviour of a ship’s compass
A ship’s gyroscope will turn to point towards the physical North Pole, not magnetic North.
This behaviour is unexplained by contemporary physics and has no conceivable explanation.
Physics is missing something here.
Flight and Bernoulli’s principle
There is no credible explanation for the phenomenon of flight.
Bernoulli’s principle is usually trotted out as the cause but plenty of aeronautical engineers on YouTube explain or demonstrate that this is simply not true.
Another hoax.
Electricity
We are told that electricity is comprised of electrons flowing through a wire but this is contradicted by Richard Feynman, a YouTube video from Veritasium and statements by other physicists.
Geocentrism
There is no well-defined absolute frame of reference for cosmic movement, acceleration or rotation. There is no defined centre to the universe.
Accordingly, no discussion of ‘centrism’ makes any sense whatsoever.
For practical purposes, just choose what seems best.
Flat Earth
Globers can no longer rely upon much of Newtonian physics to support many of their arguments but there is still sufficient evidence to propose a globe Earth as the best solution
Boats disappear below the horizon bottom first, stars appear to rotate around the poles..
Causality
Physics, particularly Newtonian physics uses the language of causality but fails to provide a decent definition of such an idea.
There is no symbol for ‘causality’ in commonly used mathematics and so no means of expressing such a notion.
Is causality ‘fundamental’ or not?
Indeterminacy
An idea from Quantum Physics but with no sensible definition or representation in terms of mathematics; there is no ‘indeterminism’ operator.
The idea is, by means of convoluted language, to present ‘randomness’ as a causal mechanism rather than a statistical outcome.
No charge
There is no such thing as ‘charge’. It has never been measured directly, is known only through the electric fields it is said to generate and has no other measurable properties.
It is surplus to requirements and can be replaced with an electromagnetic field construct.
Static electricity
Static electric fields are said to emanate from ‘charge’ and to keep instantaneous synchrony with such charge.
This, by analogy with Newtonian gravity, is ‘action at a distance’ and can similarly be discarded as a credible theory.
Do atoms exist?
The definitions of atoms according to Classical and Quantum Physics differ in a fundamental way. They cannot both be true at the same time.
The atomic structure as described by Konstantin Meyl is superior to both.
Classical ‘atoms’ do not exist.
Hafele Keating experiment
Clocks were flown around the Earth. Einstein predicted a time difference owing to speed, Konstantin Meyl claims reduced gravity at altitude as the cause.
Meyl’s calculations gave a closer prediction than Einstein’s.
Energy conservation
Energy is not in fact conserved and is relative rather than absolute (Hossenfelder). There is no consistent definition of energy as a physical process. To describe completely different processes (kinetic, thermal..) in the same terms is highly misleading.
Aether physics
The phrase ‘aether physics’ crops up more and more now but that is as far as it gets; a mere repetition of the phrase. This is in response to the failure of relativity but until the intrinsic properties of the aether can be described it isn’t really helping.
Photons
From AI: As a fundamental particle, a photon is generally considered to have no diameter, radius, or fixed “volume” that it occupies, acting in some aspects as a 0-volume point.
How does something ‘act like a 0-volume point’?
Are photons ‘fundamental’ or not?
DNA as a blueprint for life
This is a silly idea refuted by its own description and by lack of experimental evidence. There is not enough information in DNA and no physical mechanism for either translation or transcription.
The heart is not a pump
There is insufficient energy to pump the blood around the body and the blood consistently moves from low to high pressure.
This is not just unexplained by biology but has no conceivable explanation from contemporary physics.