Yes, well.

I can say after quick look at his "theory" that it falls over at the first experimental test.

Since if gravity was a vector cross-product (of electric and magnetic "force" vectors), then wires would (appear to) get heavier as the current increases. This is not what we observe.

And a vector cross product can't possibly represent gravity in three or more dimensions. Can you see why?

Finally, trying to "extend" our notion of time so it becomes equivalent to the speed of light doesn't make sense either; speed is a change in distance over time (so time is "defined" inside speed or velocity). He's claiming that time is equal to change in distance divided by . . . time ?? It's self referential, so doesn't give a "new" definition at all, nor does it make any physical sense.

Ill take your word for it that this is an implication, re gravity. I couldn't find much on people weighing electricity (especially high voltage where I suppose youd see the most difference, if this is true) except for this:

"However, you can weigh changes that act as indicators of electricity. In particular, you can insert two pieces of silver, two electrodes, into a solution of silver nitrate and weigh the pieces before and after arranging what we now call a `direct current' to flow, the weight of one electrode decreases and the other increases by the same amount."

Actually I cant see why a vector cross-product couldnt operate in three dimensions. Its a number that goes up, couldn't that be a spherical "wave" in effect like he describes?

So far as the time thing, as I understand it, he defines speed as distance traveled by the thing divided by the distance travelled by light.

Not that it makes conceptual sense to me, but then neither does most of theoretical physics.

BTW, does standard physics have an explaination for his sphere current magnetism experiment? (the magnetic current "reversing" etc)

Thats probably the aspect I am most interested in, as he presents that as "proof".