> So, let’s begin by pointing out the obvious: the Large Hadron Collider is a Large Horizontal Collider. It is flat. Almost all other experiments are horizontal.

I doubt a Large Vertical Collider, stretching 8% of the way to space, would find something different: the main purpose is to give the particles lots of energy. But, I mean, it might. We haven't checked. (For a less crackpot example, as of 2014 nobody'd tried the Michelson-Morley experiment vertically: https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/99448/105169) Science is all about checking things: that's what distinguishes the empiricists from the rationalists.

Robert A. Wilson is committing the cardinal, and very human, sin of going "other people don't know what they're talking about, therefore I'm right" – and that's what makes him a crackpot. (Well, that and the incessant prediction-free, reasoning-by-analogy that's like an exaggerated Eliezer Yudkowsky or Stephen Wolfram.) He claims to have refuted things that he simply… hasn't. But he's not wrong about the "other people don't know what they're talking about" bit.

Robert, if you're reading this, I'd appreciate an explanation of "I looked at the mathematics, and that’s what they are, real honest-to-goodness Standard Model common or garden gluons." from https://robwilson1.wordpress.com/2024/03/28/god-spins-coins/. I'm pretty sure you just imagined it, because your writing style matches the way I think when I'm overexcited and imagine things, but if you do have some kind of mathematical argument, I'd probably find it fun to read. (And perhaps enlightening: by my lay understanding of the standard model, they should be photons, but I don't really understand anything about particle physics.)