It took a while, but I think I found the PDF of the book I was talking about [0].
> fundamentally you are making an ad hominem argument, effectively saying, "this guy is a crackpot, why should we listen to him?"
Kinda, not really. I'm saying that if my recollection is correct this guy has expressed wild ideas before that were also ignored by the physics community and therefore it is worth viewing his works with suspicion because we are not qualified to evaluate it, but people who are have apparently decided it wasn't worth much.
> It doesn't matter who he is. One must examine the assertions and findings detailed in his lecture, and only if flaws can be found there can his tidal theory explaining galaxy rotation curves be defeated.
Sure, admittedly. So, why aren't any physicists giving this idea the time of day?
As I was pretty clear about in my post, I do not consider myself (nor you) qualified to assess his work in anything more than an armchair manner. The fact that his ideas don't seem to be something other physicists take seriously is something of an indicator that maybe I shouldn't either.
> Mayer's explanation for galaxy rotation curves is simple, elegant, and compelling, and it is interesting that no one at HN wants to take it head on
Because we are not physicists, as I assume you aren't either. Go to a forum full of physicists if you want a real assessment of its worth. We, being not physicists ourselves, can only judge its merit by proxy and intuition. The latter of those is especially dubious and especially prone to liking simple, elegant, compelling, and utterly wrong ideas.
> but instead will employ the all too common hand wave and other fallacious arguments. Look at it. Figure out why it is wrong or don't.
Strong words for someone who's response to all of this is "watch the video and you'll understand". Hand wave indeed.
[0] entitled The Many Directions of Time: http://www.5ision.org/GTR/amayer_the-many-directions-of-time...