Please do not give up, Aurino.
What if you are Dr. Dick? When you wrote a deep challenge to his work; about that time he wrote "Hemlock, anyone?" If you and he are the same, your critique would have been self-critique, so you had indeed taken some metaphorical hemlock?
I heard about someone: Semmelweis I think his name was. Back in days long ago, doctors and nurses went straight from the motuary to the room where they delivered babies. Semmelweis realised that the very high motality rate for baby births could be reduced if hands were washed between working in the mortuary and in the delivery room. He was right, fatalities dropped from 10% to 1%. But the establishment rubbished him, rejecting his findings apparantly. They say he died "insane".
Dr. Dick may have discovered a statistical conjuring trick underlying physics. To do with definitions built from the past being used to "predict" the future. He may have found that the predictions level of accuracy is inherent in their present level of accuracy and in their "leaning on each other (circular dictionary style). But he need not have a fate like Semmelwise. If he would only be more positive and have a sustained discussion!
You once wrote that none of Dr. Dick's equations are new or correct. That seemed too deep an insight not to have come from Dr. Dick himself! "Not correct"? Who would think of that? Dr. Dick: refering to the notion that his equations are slightly different from the orthodox ones?
And note that you and Dr. Dick both have computer programming knowledge. He has shown characteristics like you, and you like him.
He requires the rule of logical consistency to reach his conclusions.