Contact Information

Steve David Urich
United States of America
Master of Science Electrical Engineering (MSEE)
e-mail address:

9 thoughts on “Contact Information

  1. Looks like your money ran out in 2013. Miles is still cranking out interesting stuff. He may not 100% accurate but far more accurate than your dead blog.

  2. Miles, much of what you are saying is interesting and I want to believe more of it, but i keep remembering what you said is a dead give away that something is fake. There will be a 33 somewhere. Your name Miles Mathis is MM, which if we turn them a quarter turn clockwise we get 33, in the same way we get 33 from Willy Wonka; Matt Murdock; Walter White; Woodrow Wilson; Marshall Mathers etc. And I believe you are wrong about the flat earth (or intentionally mis-directing). Perhaps you are CIA with permission to break some of these stories open because we needed help, no one figured them out all this time. I love the stories about all the hoaxes and fake deaths and I’m inclined to agree with you on them.

  3. An entire website dedicated solely to ‘discrediting’ one Individual whom you claim has only 3 adherents? Why do you care so very much? Why bother at all? Your vehemence is suspect.

  4. Thank you for this blog. It’s been incredibly helpful in getting my head around this whole Mathis phenomena which is still pretty new to me. I just posted a comment on an old thread on what I can only assume is a blog he runs under a different name and I suspect it won’t pass moderation, so here it is. Thanks again

    I’m new to all things Mathis. It’s only been a few months since he and his um, theories have crossed my path. But I must admit I’m fascinated. Forget the math. Forget the Pi=4 silliness. Forget the entire claim of the physical impossibility to measure a piece of string IF it lays on a surface in any sort of curve. Forget all that because that nonsense has been soundly laid to rest by many, more elegantly than I could and frankly, his inane theories of centuries of botched physics and mathematics aren’t even the most interesting aspect of his pathology.

    Here we have a guy who has made a living, one would presume by his relentless begging for donations on his various pages, by simply morphing himself into the veritable King of Internet Crazy. And obviously, there are many who lap this stuff up. Clearly this blog is his. Clearly he authors and debates on its comments thread as multiple people. There can’t be any serious questioning of that. I’m sure, if this thing is even still monitored and I’m VERY lucky a comment will appear pointing out my inability to prove that empirically. So be it. It’s still the safest bet one could possibly make.

    But it gets better. Here we have a guy who claims Pi=$. That would be enough for most erstwhile Overlords of Crazy but he goes on! His also claims the non existence of all manner of current events. 9-11 was a false flag operation. Sandyhook was staged. The Trayvon Martin case is a mystery and likely a Government ploy to start a race war. It goes on and on.

    Well, as a guy who is endlessly fascinated by the pathology of conspiracy theorists and their acolytes, I feel like I’ve hit the motherlode. And his acolytes do exist. Evidently the bulk of them all have the exact same speaking and writing style but there are a few unfortunate non-Mathis individuals who have actually bought into his crazy. I actually know one and he buys and regurgitates it all, hook line and sinker. At first it’s hard to fathom the mind that can take in such a vast amount of seemingly unrelated conspiracies as gospel but slowly it dawns that there’s a mental illness involved. The exact name of the condition is irrelevant. It’s enough to know it exists.

    In conclusion, I must say how incredibly grateful I am to be living in an age where direct communication with people who baffle and fascinate me is possible. I know that should anyone read my comment from this blog, it’s surely mathis himself. So, thank you Miles. I mean no disrespect. I realize no one would choose to be wired like you are, but thank you for the endlessly fascinating entertainment.”


  5. Hello! I ran across Miles Mathis’ site because I’m reading a popular book about relativity, which made me wonder if there is or could be a real light clock, which led me to Miles Mathis’ site, and then right back to Google to see who was making fun of him. Thanks for making this blog to help fight the good fight against crackpottery.

  6. I stumbled onto the Mathis website some 12 months ago and encountered some – to put it mildly – fantastical claims about mathematics and various branches of science. Over a period of weeks I studied many of his papers closely. They are written in a very persuasive style designed to sweep up and carry off the unwary. However, close study of those within my modest sphere of knowledge began to unravel, for example, the famous triangle diagram in establishing pi = 4 equates the radius length (e.g. in meters) to the tangential length of a velocity vector (e.g. in meter/sec). I don’t believe you can compare vectors of different quantities simply because you can draw them on the same diagram.
    Furthermore, his paper on ‘Rewriting the Schrodinger Equation’ gives Linus Pauling a decent hiding for “pushing” derivations. Now, I was never a great fan of Pauling and his valence bond theory but I couldn’t see him making the blunders that Mathis attributed to him in his classic text “Introduction to Quantum Mechanics”. This text, by the way, can be perused free of charge on the internet. Mathis accuses him of making, on p.54 of the text, substitutions for W (energy) and p (momentum), by partial differential operators both with respect to x. This would have been correct for momentum but the operator for energy was with respect to t. Mathis made a glaring error here and then proceeded to denigrate Pauling for an error Pauling never made in the first place. The error was Mathis’.
    I sent him a polite email suggesting he had made a typo and that he may need to review his consequent arguments. To which he replied brusquely that he had not made a mistake and that it didn’t matter because the whole of quantum mechanics was built on false assumptions anyway. Even were this true, it still would not justify retaining a patently false ‘reference’ to a published text. This is not only sloppy and arrogant (for failing to check) but plain untruthful. I figured here was not a man to reason with and so withdrew from the discussion.

    • Richard,

      I have heard similar stories countless times, and have experienced it myself first-hand. If you send Mathis an e-mail pointing out a mistake he has made, he immediately accuses you of lacking the intelligence to appreciate the depth of his genius. And if you persist, he goes into a rage and sends back a profanity-laced response. That’s how Mathis deals with any criticism leveled in his direction; he throws a tantrum.

      I still have the e-mails from my correspondence with Mathis, and will gladly send them to anyone interested in reading his foul-mouthed responses. However, I won’t post any of it at this Blog; it’s too vulgar and obscene. But then, everything Mathis has ever written is obscene; his e-mails are merely the worst of the lot.

      Anyway, thanks for pointing out the mistake Mathis has made regarding Linus Pauling. Give me some time to check it out, and if it rings true (I’m certain it will; is there any scientist that Mathis hasn’t smeared and bad-mouthed?), I will write up a paper and create a new thread.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s