- The successful experiment of Michelson-Morley (not the failed that Einstein used as base for his theory).

Those damned conspiratory Physicists hid that from the rest of us! Darn them!  The Luminiferous Aesther hypothesis has been adequately dismissed in experimental tests in the past hundred and more years.  There is no measurable medium through which EM waves/particles propagate - they propagate through the space-time continuum itself as best determined.

- Gravitational shielding.

???

- Antigravitation experiments.

There is no such thing.  Noone has proposed a hypothesis of anti-gravitation that has become theory.  And the experiments that I've seen of so-called 'antigravity' involve other well-known factors or fraud.

• Difference on the value for g depending on the method used for its masurement.

The value of g (gravitational acceleration on the surface of Earth) varies for many reasons - density, distance from the center (which isn't exactly the same over the planet since it is an oblate sphere - like all planets).  g may vary, but there is no place where it is 2g or 0.5g (ON THE SURFACE OF THE PLANET mind you).

• Antigravitatory forces in gyroscopes.*

Again, I'm skeptical.

- The speed of gravity that is very much bigger than the speed of light.

Current observations agree that the speed of gravity propagation is the same as the speed of light.  Next you'll tell me that Newton was correct concerning 'instantaneous action at a distance'.

- Behaviour of Galaxies that suggest the existence of a gravitational force 1/r and not 1/r^2.

Hmmmm...

*- And why in some locations a car with the motor turned off and without brakes climb up a hill?

Big, HMMMMM...  Cars 'climb up hill' because of an illusion.  The hill appears to be uphill due to surrounding references.  In reality the hill has a downward slope.  It has been evidenced.

You sound like someone who will believe anything.  I have some swamp land in Florida for sale - if you buy now I'll throw in a bridge! ;)  Will you be discussing the evil suppression of 'Cold-fusion' next?

Look, science is a self-correcting, self-regulating system.  The idea is that someone structures a hypothesis to explain some unknown phenomenon (in total or in part).  The someone or someone else constructs at least one experiment to validate the hypothesis.  If the experiment fails, it doesn't mean that the hypothesis is incorrect - may be a badly constructed experiment.  But, if or when it does succeed that is when things get interesting.  This is the self-correcting part.  Anyone should have access to the experimental data and experimental setup and procedure for review and verification of results.  This is why 'cold-fusion' is bunk.  Every other scientist who tried to verify the results of the original experiment had no success.  And the hypothesis was on shaky ground to begin with.  Out the window it went despite the cries of foul from the original scientists.

To err is human.  We are not perfect and neither is the scientific method (no formal system is perfect, by the way).  Miliken almost pulled a theory out of a poorly constructed experiment.  That is why there are measures that allow others to examine every part of a hypothesis and its experimental counterpart.  The scientific method is built with human error in mind.

Unfortunately for you, Einstein's Mythological theories have been tested, tested again, retested, tested over and over and over.  And they have withstood over 100 years of battering.  That means that they have adequately achieved THEORY status.  Your intention is to say that the hundreds of thousands of Physicists and Engineers since then who have used his theories are either all idiots, fools, or delusional.  And then you mention things like antigravity and that the speed of light can be faster or that gravity propagates faster - even though these have already been measured (billions and billions of times in the case of light).

For instance, you mention super-conductors.  Um, electricity (electrons) moves at LESS THAN the 'c' (speed of light - EM propagation) in solids despite their high conductivity.  Super-conductors just increase that speed a bit - but it is still LESS THAN 'c'.  If you are under the allusion that electricity travels at 'c' through circuit traces and wires and whatnot, you need to retake that course in Physics.

I'm all for new theories - but only those that have passed the gauntlet of the scientific method; not popular alternatives and potential hypotheses.  I don't call it String Theory.  In no way has any form of it ever been put to a test of its validity.  It is a hypothesis being constructed on the backwash of previous data.  And the continued refinement and changes to it speak of its 'not-quite-ready-for-theoryhood' situation.  It is String Hypothesis and that's where it remains - esp. with the need to cart in 11 dimensions.  The mantra remains, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."  Einstein delivered.  Planck delivered.

C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg off.

 -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone