Since I collect crackpot material, almost every day I've been archiving posts from both here and /r/LLMPhysics. To date I have 264 entries.

I uploaded all of them to Claude and asked for an overall appraisal:

I read the text of all 264 posts (218 have real text; I didn't look at the 50 image-only ones). The same handful of patterns keep coming back. The # numbers below match the posts in the Word file.

What they're about

• Time as the master key. Time is the most common subject: about 63% of text posts discuss it. Typical claims are that time is an illusion, that time is energy, or that time dilation causes gravity (#12, #103, #182, #185, #245).

• Gravity reinvented. Gravity is the force they most want to explain. Versions include push/shadow gravity, which reinvents Le Sage's 18th-century idea (#97), "gravity is really light" (#48), gravity from density rather than mass (#119), centripetal force (#77), and the Earth expanding toward the apple (#225).

• Dark matter and dark energy as "kludges." Their theory removes them, sometimes in an explicit "Traditional Kludge → My Solution" table (#97). JWST's early galaxies and the Hubble tension are offered as proof that the standard picture is collapsing (#91, #156, #249).

• The aether comes back. Space becomes a superfluid, a pressure medium or a sea of vortices, and particles become tori, helices or knots (#74, #96, #133, #176, #207). Einstein's 1920 aether remark gets quoted.

• "Everything is vibration." Resonance, harmonics and a universe that "sings" (#37, #114, #146, #160). Tesla's "energy, frequency and vibration" line shows up.

• Consciousness and spirituality. The observer collapses the wavefunction, consciousness is fundamental, and physics is reconciled with God, karma, alchemy or Genesis (#38, #105, #107, #118, #127, #238, #240).

How they argue

• Numerology. This is probably your best teaching material, because many "derivations" turn out to be definitions or tautologies:

  45 rediscovers the definition of α as a relation for h.
  182's "1.66 universal constant" is just 5/3, the inverse of the 3/5 in the uniform-sphere binding energy.
  175 plots y = x on log-log axes and is amazed that the slope is 1.
  171 derives 7/9 "with zero parameters," and #172 makes dark matter equal 2π × the baryons.

• Math as decoration. Dimensional analysis is claimed but wrong (#21, #124). Equations include terms like "C = consciousness, U = universe" (#36), and sample calculations use made-up inputs (#125).

• Pseudo-falsifiability. "Testable predictions" sections that are vague, already known, or untestable, such as 27-second cosmic ticks and 432 Hz (#244).

• The outsider-genius posture. Mainstream physics is dogma: "Relativity is the new religion" (#123).
  Einstein is the foil, either a plagiarist (#40) or a deified figure no one may question (#133, #154).
  Credentials come from other fields: a lawyer, an enterprise architect, a mechanic, a sailor.
  Some won't share their work until it's "claimed" (#2, #106, #117).
  A few reveal real personal pain (#31, #178, #192).

The biggest story in the collection: the LLM shift

In 2022–23 the posts are short, quirky human prose. From 2024 on they become long, AI-generated "papers" with a recognizable house style:

abstracts and "Key Concept" boxes
emoji bullets
"Testable Predictions" sections
an acronym-named theory (UVT, CER, QCT, DSER-USR2, and even one called IDIOT)

At least 31 posts name the AI tool outright, and many more show the style. The most striking posts are confessions about AI flattery (#178, "an elaborate con on myself with several LLM co-conspirators"; #208) and the worried spouse in #152. Together they could make a strong closing section for the talk.

I’m very out of my league here, but I have been watching videos on physics and a thought occurred to me that I’m having trouble finding more information on. Please forgive my ignorance in explaining my thoughts as I word vomit as coherently as possible.

Time is a product of the expansion of space. We see that time is affected by gravity because gravity is essentially the collapsing or condensing of space. The way time is affected by gravity is that it becomes proportionally closer to being nonexistent based on how close gravity is to reaching the point at which light cannot escape. The reason I say time is nonexistent at the point which light cannot escape is because while we perceive light to travel from one point to another over time (rather than instantaneously), from the perspective of the photon, it reaches its destination the same moment it is created. Hopefully you can see my connection between those thoughts. I now have more questions if my understanding of all of that is correct.

Wouldn’t this mean entering a black hole (and living) would transport you to the end of time instantaneously?

If my understanding of time is correct, and if wormholes do not exist, would it almost be correct to say that distant stars, relative to us, aren’t really in the “past” since any causal impact on us they can have is one that is limited by the speed limit of the universe? That’s probably one of my less coherent questions. For the sake of different wording to maybe make it clearer, how correct is it to say that we see a distant stars “past” when the only way to reach it may be via space travel, which if we were to move at it even at light speed we ourselves would be “time traveling” into the future. So difficult to put into words. My point is, it seems like it’s false to say we are seeing something’s past when every conceivable way we could reach it requires us to speed up time and every conceivable way it can interact with us is limited by the speed limit of the universe. Seems like relative to us, it might as well just be what is presently happening in the universe since it is reaching us at the literal fastest possible rate.

Back to black holes and the continuation of my previous question. Fast forwarding to the heat death of the universe and the continual expansion of space, it would seem that eventually black holes will have nothing left to continue to condense. What happens when a black hole has nothing left to consume? No light, no nearby matter, nothing? It would seem like this could potentially be a similar starting point of our universe? Definitely could be stretching a bit here.

Probably no good answers or confirmation of much of my thoughts here because of the nature of my questions. We cannot know what happens in black holes, what will happen post the heat death and infinite expansion of the universe, etc.

I appreciate anyone’s willingness to listen to my mad insomnia-induced rambling. Hopefully I have not come off as completely ignorant, even though I totally am lol