Disruptive: Rewriting the rules of physics is now available!

Posted by Steven Bryant On January - 2 - 2016

I am thrilled to share that my new book, Disruptive: Rewriting the rules of physics, is available for pre–order at Barnes & Noble and at Amazon.com! Disruptive is a thought–provoking book, one that introduces a new unified model called Modern Mechanics, and explains where and why Einstein’s theory went wrong. It will fundamentally change our […]






Episode 23 – Introduction to Modern Classical Mechanics

Posted by Steven Bryant On July - 18 - 2011

Modern Classical Mechanics is a new, intuitive, model that yields better than 100 times the accuracy of the Einstein-Lorentz equations in several experiments including Michelson-Morley and Ives-Stillwell!  Because it distinguishes between Length and Wavelength, its theoretical explanations avoid non-intuitive concepts like time dilation, length contraction, and the twin paradox; each of which are required by […]






Episode 21 – The Failure of Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof

Posted by Steven Bryant On March - 21 - 2010

We have offered many mathematical and conceptual challenges to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. In Episode 21, we offer compelling evidence that Einstein’s Spherical Wave Proof fails. Without this proof, Einstein cannot establish a relationship between Relativity and the constancy of the speed of light; a cornerstone characteristic of the theory. This Episode reexamines the key […]






Episode 20 – AAAS Conference Presentation – Averages, Rates, and Functions

Posted by Steven Bryant On August - 29 - 2009

“I live 20 miles per hour from the University.” Is that statement confusing?  It should be.  In Episode 20, we take a look at Rates and Functions, and discuss how they have been mistreated for the past century.  More importantly, we’ll take a look at how key concepts and mathematics can get confused if we […]






Episode 19 (Video) – The Meaning of Moving Systems Models (CICS and SRT)

Posted by Steven Bryant On June - 15 - 2009

Do you want to know what Time Dilation is and why Einstein needed it to make Relativity work? In Episode 19, we explain what things mean.   We’ll talk about the main concepts that are important for each moving system model – Newton, Lorentz, Einstein, and the CICS Model. After watching this episode, you should […]






Episode 18 (Video) – Part 2 – Comparative Analysis of Moving Systems Models

Posted by Steven Bryant On October - 6 - 2008

In Episode 18, I present Part 2 of a 2 part presentation delivered at the AAAS/NPA Conference held in April 2008 at the University of New Mexico.  This presentation compares and contrasts the models presented by Michelson-Morley, Lorentz, Einstein, and myself – clearly outlining the key assumptions behind each model.  In addition, I summarize the […]






Why don’t you talk about simultaneity, the twin paradox, time dilation, or length contraction?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Why don’t you talk about simultaneity, the twin paradox, time dilation, or length contraction?

Is your analysis based on invented techniques not recognized by the scientific community?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Is your analysis based on invented techniques not recognized by the scientific community?

If Einstein’s math is wrong, how does he arrive with the same answer using different methods?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on If Einstein’s math is wrong, how does he arrive with the same answer using different methods?

If Einstein’s math is wrong, how does he arrive with the same answer using different methods?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on If Einstein’s math is wrong, how does he arrive with the same answer using different methods?

Doesn’t your analysis confuse fixed-point and wave-front equations?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Doesn’t your analysis confuse fixed-point and wave-front equations?

Wasn’t Einstein’s 1905 paper just an example?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Wasn’t Einstein’s 1905 paper just an example?

Is it possible that Einstein simply made a notational error in his 1905 paper, and the math is actually correct?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Is it possible that Einstein simply made a notational error in his 1905 paper, and the math is actually correct?

Doesn’t the experimental evidence prove Einstein’s theory?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Doesn’t the experimental evidence prove Einstein’s theory?

Why haven’t you published your findings in one of the major scientific journals?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on Why haven’t you published your findings in one of the major scientific journals?

What specifically are you saying is wrong with Einstein’s theory?

Posted by Steven Bryant On February - 7 - 2009Comments Off on What specifically are you saying is wrong with Einstein’s theory?