Using Occam's Razor to Cut Through 10,000 Years of Mysteries
I'm so confident you'll want to prove me wrong that I'm giving it away for free. Download it. Read it. Then email me with why I'm full of shit.
No email required. No BS. Just click and read.
Welcome. I'm Dr. Wayne Kerr.
I'm not a real doctor. I have no PhD. I started reading physics last month.
But I have data, Occam's Razor, noble sense (because if common sense were common, scientists wouldn't need 95% invisible universes), and the audacity to ask: Why do scientists have to make shit up when simpler explanations exist?
This website is for my book: "THE SIMPLEST EXPLANATION: Using Occam's Razor to Cut Through 10,000 Years of Mysteries"
Credentials: None
Experience: One month of reading
Methodology: Noble Sense + Occam's Razor + real data
Probability I'm right: You decide
Audacity: Off the charts
Göbekli Tepe, Pyramids, Stonehenge = global early warning network. Not temples. Planetary defense. Built after Younger Dryas impact (12,800 years ago) by survivors who said "never again."
"Gods from the sky" = high-altitude Asian populations descended to Mesopotamian valleys after floods. Different eyes (epicanthic folds) = must be divine. We've been calling humans "aliens" for 5,000 years.
Cuneiform wasn't for commerce or poetry. It was for SURVIVAL. Recording asteroid positions. The Library of Alexandria didn't just burn books—it burned our planetary defense data.
Everything in freefall through spacetime. "Accelerating expansion" = us speeding up in the fall. Tested with real SDSS data: massive galaxies ARE at higher redshift (r=0.621). Dark energy? Not needed.
Galaxy rotation curves = galactic magnetosphere from falling through space for 9 billion years. Like a reentry vehicle's plasma envelope, but galaxy-scale. 50 years of searching for particles, found nothing. Maybe because it's just compressed gas at our magnetic boundary.
Not exotic singularities. Just matter that hit terminal velocity (c) in freefall. Time dilation freezes them from our perspective. Event horizon = where freefall reaches light speed. Simple physics, no magic.
If freefall explains cosmic acceleration, dark matter, dark energy, black holes, and galaxy formation... maybe gravity is all we need. 95% invisible universe? Or just 100% visible universe in freefall?
Thoughts, updates, and responses to people telling me I'm wrong
So I was testing my new Mac Mini M4 Pro tonight - running a local 70B parameter LLM with RAG to search for spacecraft signatures in my security cam feed. Not just basic object detection. I fed it files on UAV/UAS characteristics, orbital mechanics, known aircraft profiles. Built a whole retrieval system to semantically search for "things that don't match known patterns."
I'm on the roof deck, monitoring the feed on my laptop, looking northwest toward Area 51 because... well, if you're gonna test spacecraft detection in Vegas, might as well aim at the interesting part of the sky.
And the RAG system flagged something. Fast-moving object, vertical trajectory. Straight. Up.
Not across the sky like a plane. Not a satellite pass. Not a meteor. The LLM queried its embedded knowledge base and basically returned: "No matching patterns in training data for vertical acceleration profile at this velocity." When your 70B model with access to aerospace documentation says "I don't know what this is" - that's when it gets interesting.
Now look, I run lvufocam.com. I've seen weird shit. But this was different. My own AI was confused. When your machine learning model trained on thousands of aircraft basically says "I have no idea what this is" - that's when it gets interesting.
Skeptic brain says: military test from Creech or Nellis. They do rocket tests. Could be a hypersonic vehicle. Could be classified propulsion.
But the guy who wrote Theory #2 (Anunaki weren't aliens) is now thinking... what if I'm wrong about that one? What if some of this shit really IS extraterrestrial?
The M4 Pro handled the processing like a beast though. 16-core neural engine crushing real-time object detection. Even if I didn't catch aliens, I confirmed the hardware works.
Reviewing the full footage tomorrow. If it's something explainable, cool. If it's not... well, that's a conversation.
Question still stands: If "up" doesn't exist in space, where the hell was it going?
Tech specs: Mac Mini M4 Pro, Llama 3.1 70B quantized, RAG pipeline with aerospace documentation embeddings, ChromaDB vector store, 4K security cam feed. The M4 handled the 70B model like a champ. Update pending full analysis.
I was on my roof deck tonight looking at the stars. And I had a thought that won't leave me alone:
Where the fuck is "up"?
We say the universe is expanding. Expanding from what? Expanding "outward" - but outward relative to what? There's no center. There's no edge. There's no "up" in space.
But there IS down.
Down is the direction you're being pulled by gravity. Down is toward mass. Down is the direction spacetime curves.
So if "down" exists but "up" doesn't... what if we've had it backwards this whole time? What if galaxies aren't moving away from each other - they're all falling in the same direction, and we're just measuring the acceleration?
Physicists will say "there is no preferred direction in space." Cool. Then explain why gravity only pulls one way. Explain why time only moves forward. Explain why entropy only increases.
The universe has arrows. We just don't want to admit it because it breaks our pretty symmetrical equations.
Anyway. That's Theory #4. Read the book.
Want to tell me why I'm wrong? Email me or call the hotline (coming soon).
Think I'm wrong? Good. Prove it. Here's the code, data sources, and methodology.
import pandas as pd
import numpy as np
from scipy.stats import pearsonr
# Load SDSS galaxy data
# Data source: Sloan Digital Sky Survey DR17
df = pd.read_csv('sdss_galaxy_sample.csv')
# Calculate correlation between galaxy mass and redshift
mass = df['stellar_mass'] # in solar masses
redshift = df['redshift']
# Remove outliers and NaN values
mask = (~np.isnan(mass)) & (~np.isnan(redshift))
mass_clean = mass[mask]
redshift_clean = redshift[mask]
# Calculate Pearson correlation
correlation, p_value = pearsonr(mass_clean, redshift_clean)
print(f"Correlation coefficient: {correlation:.3f}")
print(f"P-value: {p_value:.2e}")
print(f"Sample size: {len(mass_clean)}")
# Expected result if freefall theory is correct:
# Massive galaxies should show higher redshift
# Actual result from my analysis: r = 0.621, p < 0.001
All analysis code available on request. If you find errors in my methodology, I'll buy you a beer and update the book. That's science.
Get notified when I release new theories, get roasted by scientists, or appear on podcasts.
No spam. Just updates when shit gets interesting.
📡 I also run lvufocam.com — tracking UFOs in Las Vegas
(Yes, I believe aliens exist. No, I don't think the Anunaki were aliens. Read Theory #2.)
Podcast bookings, debate challenges, or to tell me I'm wrong:
(Yes, that's really the email. Yes, I thought it was funny too.)