Tim Draper interviews a physicist who argues Einstein's general relativity is fundamentally flawed because it eliminated the ether and can't explain quantum mechanics. The speaker claims the physics establishment uses dark matter and dark energy as ad-hoc patches to preserve Einstein's equations, and functions as a self-policing monopoly that suppresses dissent.
Chapters
If Einstein was never born, we'd be better off. If Einstein lived today, and all the information that we've gathered over the last 100 years, he would never have come up with the theory of relativity, general relativity. So it's just, you know, he was a brilliant, brilliant person in the right place at the right time with the wrong solution.
Explain the theory, your theory, and how it differs from the direction Einstein was taking us.
Yeah, well, first of all, you know, Einstein made a mistake. And to his credit, he called it out first. And he introduced his theory of general relativity in 1917. It took over from Newtonian physics. You know, a whole community of physicists took off in another direction, which he sent them on, down the path of relativity. In 1920, he came out and he said, there's a mistake. We need to have— you can't imagine relativity without having an ether. What's an ether? But ether was the one critical thing he eliminated from Newtonian physics. And he tried to get it back in and the community would not let him do it. And then in 1927, relativity failed at the subatomic level. And then they bifurcated. Quantum went one direction and relativity went the other direction. So the big stuff was theorized through relativity. The small stuff is quantum. And at that point, if it was a self-correcting system, they would've stopped and gone back and found the first principles error, fixed it, and then moved on. But we're stuck now with Einsteinian physics, which is flawed at the foundation. And we spent the last 100 years digging down the wrong holes. And the unfortunate thing is they can't stop digging. They can't stop the gravy train. So we're kind of stuck in the— there's little or no progress being made at 2 ends of the theoretical spectrum.
And then, I mean, there have been Nobel Prizes for dark energy and dark matter. And tell me, do those make sense? Why, why have we gone in that direction and why do we keep going in that direction?
Well, we went in that direction because that's where Einstein set us. And the physics community is ruled by Decisions are made by peers. It's peer review. So the Nobel Prize basically is the most popular physicist gets a Nobel Prize for whatever he's working on. The problem with physics is the education is not actually a— it's closer to an indoctrination than education. Education, they want you to have critical thinking. They want you to question things. When you go through the physics education, 20 years' worth, They tell you what to believe. If you start questioning it, you're not going to pass your test, you're not going to get your PhD. So what we've done is we've created this multi-generational cycle, educational cycle, that has eliminated the— that's limited the solution set for the physics community in an area where they cannot self-correct. And it's a real— it's a tragedy because there's a bunch of brilliant people that know we're going the wrong direction. But the solution is outside of the Einsteinian theories. And if they suggest changing direction, they get excommunicated, they get canceled. They cancel physicists all the time.
So I'm in the venture capital business and I am always looking for industries where they're run by monopolies or oligopolies. And those oligopolies looking at the world in a certain way, and they're centralized and they make all the decisions at the top.
And though—
and if anybody's making a decision counter to that, they're excommunicated. And so I'm always looking for entrepreneurs who are trying something new with new technologies, trying to break into that industry so that they can form and grow inside that industry. So we're trying to challenge those those theses or challenge those monopolies. Would you say the scientific community is sort of an equal monopoly? It's— you think it's a monopoly like CERN always gets a certain amount of money and the US government always gives a certain amount of money to the physicists and all of that and it just keeps growing the way it's growing and there's nothing saying There's no entrepreneur in this case coming in and saying, wait a second, they might have been wrong.
Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's clear that they were wrong. The problem is that the entrepreneurs get selected against in college. The guys who ask questions in college and say, hey guys, this doesn't sound right, this is illogical, they don't make it into the physics establishment. They get weeded out long before They get to reach a peer level. The physics community is worse than most oligopolies in that they're self-policing. And the money that comes into the physics community, so the NIH, the National Science Foundation, NSH, who does all the investments in grants and so forth, they send the grant papers to the physicists to tell them which ones are the most promising. Well, they're going to tell them the ones that they're working on are the most promising. And so that you get so far down a rat hole—
like the union, the government unions in California, Ronald Reagan, how much they deserve.
Sure. And they negotiate with themselves. That's right. That's Ronald Reagan's biggest mistake. But so what's happening is, you know, you get to a point where the guys who are making the decisions on the payments are saying, okay, I've been backing CERN now for 40 years. Nothing's coming out of it. We're spending a lot of money on it. But I think if they just do this much more money, we can find something. We're going to find the Big Bang. And so they just, they keep on throwing, you know, good money after bad, but which is bad. But the worst thing is we're educating the next generation of physicists on a model that we know is wrong. But we don't tell them, hey, it may be wrong, a little bit wrong. You know, you should question some of these things. There's no questioning.
You know, fortunately, there are teenagers in the world. They question everything.
If we had more teenagers running this.
So now you've talked about this as the, the science of the small and then the science of the very, very large. Can you kind of go through that? Is it like, here's an atom with an electron and proton running around it, and here's the sun and it's got planets running around it? Is it— are those things similar? Are they a part of your theory? What's that about?
So Einstein recognized his mistake. He spent the majority of his career trying to fix it, and he failed. He spent 40 years sort of on the outside trying to fix his error. So there's one building block in the physical universe. That's the atom. There's nothing else. The sun is a giant accumulation of atoms. The Earth is a large accumulation of atoms. Everything is simply atoms. So theoretically, I mean, 4th grade logic, whatever behavior is happening at the atom scale should cumulatively represent the behavior of what happens at a large object. So gravity should be the result of whatever's happening in all the parts that make up the body of it. Well, today it is off by 4, it's off by I think one guy, one physicist, it was like 120 zeros.
So gravity is off by that.
The description of the small, description of the large are off. It's impossible to reconcile them. So logically, the unified theory of physics is what the Holy Grail is. You remember the Higgs boson? The God particle?
Yeah.
Well, that came, they announced they found it. They got their funding for the next expansion of CERN, and that kind of disappeared off. It happens over and over and over again. The dark—
but, but they know how to market well. They have the Big Bang, they have the, the boson God particle, they have dark energy, dark matter.
Dark matter is a great example. We saw something, uh, it was Vera Rubin. Back in the 1950s, telescope technology got to a point where we saw galaxies spinning, and Einstein predicted a certain spin rate based on the gravitational theory. Well, the spinning defied Einstein's theory. So you'd think they go, what's wrong with Einstein's theory? No. Hey, we found dark matter. It's like they made this stuff up. It's completely made up.
To fill in for the— to make the math work for the equation. And so suddenly they've made it an even more complex equation when the answer is just one.
Yeah. Yeah. The answer is Einstein made a mistake in the— but what's funny is, and then that caused another mistake, which means, oh, if you got that much more matter, then the universe must be collapsing. There's dark energy. Fixed it again. But it's the last line of defense for the physics community is a mathematician. If you see something that conflicts, you get 2 options. One is go out and find out why it conflicts, or the other is discover something that makes the math work. And once the math works, then they put it in a book, teach it to our kids. Great.
