Special relativity Only Valid Under Handpicked Conditions?

[yadayaba]

Short version: How accurate is this paper: http://www.wbabin.net/ajay/sharma17.pdf

Long version:
Hello! Physics is not my field of study, but here's my situation: I was having a religious debate and we were discussing the origin of the universe. I decided to quote Lawrence Krauss (a physicist) from his lecture 'A Universe From Nothing' in which he said the total energy of the universe is zero and virtual particles emerge in nothingness from blending space and time. I wanted to show these were all indicators that the universe may have indeed came from nothing.

My opponent denied my statement so I sent him an excerpt of Lawrence's lecture showing these virtual particles: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo&feature=player_detailpage#t=1251s
He still denied it on the basis that this is just a computational model. I replied Lawrence said they measured its weight to the tenth decimal place. He still denied it claiming this is just theoretical physics, and the statement it takes up 90% of our body weight is ridiculous.

At that point, another debater, who claimed to have a PHD in physics, said the relativity theory itself was still under dispute. He started lecturing me about photons and black holes and anti-matter. I could not understand him due to my limited knowledge, nor did I trust his information since he was my opponent. I requested him to stop, but then he sent me this file: http://www.wbabin.net/ajay/sharma17.pdf

I'm now curious if he was misleading me by exploiting my limited knowledge, or was he actually right. And in that case, does this disqualify Lawrence Krauss?

 

[bcrowell]

At that point, another debater, who claimed to have a PHD in physics, said the relativity theory itself was still under dispute.

This person is incorrect. Relativity has been confirmed by a large number of experiments. It is not speculative. For more information, see the sticky at the top of this forum titled "FAQ: Experimental Basis of Special Relativity."

Ajay Sharma is a kook. You could ask the person who sent the Sharma pdf to support his/her arguments using papers that have been published in refereed scientific journals.