Naturally you deemphasize what you yourself do not understand. All three are as real as any aspect of science you yourself have studied.
Actually, I know a decent amount (not much compared to professors, **** loads compared to you) about zero point energy, quantum vacuums, vacuum energy and their phenomenology. Multidimensional string singularities and their antigravity effects in higher dimensions is something I do research on (not much but it's a working understanding). I also do research into 10 and 11 dimensional supergravity models. So there isn't much you mention which I'd have any need to deemphasize.
Given Hutchinson cannot even 'reproduce' the effects he claims there is, almost by definition, no scientific work I can deemphasize. Despite decades since his initial claims and actually a great deal of funding into various quantum effects in exotic materials, nothing has come of his claims.
Can you point to scientific work into those things which prove them to be real? Given AdS/CFT gravity models are a conjecture even in terms of their mathematical concepts, never mind physical phenomena and GR doesn't give anti-gravity systems for anything but some extreme situations (the immediate region around rotating charged singularities for instance), antigravity isn't supported by evidence. Extraction of zero point energy is possible but not in a way which makes it a power source. You can extract energy from the vacuum via photon generation by using two mirrors very close to one another (micrometres) and then oscillating them slightly. Except the frequency of the oscillations cannot be constant (or even it's derivative be constant if memory serves) and the forces required to produce enough acceleration for the effect to be measurable would pretty much liquify the mirrors due to stress.
But feel free to prove me wrong. Given you admit you don't know quantum mechanics and even the nonsense in the 'galaxy spiral' or whatever it was not obvious to you, I think it's a little silly of you to claim that there's certain results or phenomena in physics which not only fly in the face of all current physics but are also entirely outside your range of knowledge.
Einstein had no formal training that in any way shaped or defined his theory of relativity. His LATER obtained "PhD" was a technical requirement to validate his papers and NOT a precursor to his understanding.
Actually, Einstein had considerable correspondence with people like Lorentz and Minkowski, both of whom made huge contributions to special relativity. Special relativity was published in 1905, along with several other ground breaking papers on Brownian motion, the photoelectric effect (which got him a Nobel prize) and the relationship between mass, energy and momentum. In the 10 years which followed, up to 1915 when he published general relativity, Einstein worked closely with Hilbert, one of the greatest mathematicians ever (certainly the best mathematician on the planet in terms of maths relating to what was to become GR).
Before 1905 Einstein had done a physics degree. He was part of a 'journal club', who did considerable reading of the major physicists and philosophers of the day, including Poincare (who also was to be a major player in relativity) and Mach. He'd studied electromagnetism too.
I'll admit I was incorrect about him having a PhD while in the patent office, he obtained it during his time at the patent office. None the less, he had considerable formal education into the physics of the day, put in a lot of time keeping up with the latest developments and certainly general relativity was the culmination of working with the best and brightest mathematicians and physicists of the day.
Just look at the Wikipedia page on Einstein and you'll see he had plenty of physics education.
You do not require a PhD to publish a paper. Speaking as someone who doesn't have a PhD, part of getting a PhD is to write papers which add to scientific knowledge. If I couldn't publish a paper till I had a PhD I'd have serious trouble getting the PhD due to lack of contribution to science. A sort of Catch 22. And as a shameless pat on my own back, my first paper went online today!
"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."
Albert Einstein
If Einstein were alive I'm sure he'd say that he wouldn't have done what he did if he had
zero education in maths and physics. After all, another quote of his is "Whatever your problems in maths, I can assure you mine are greater." because he was wrestling with a level of mathematics which even now is something a lot of universities don't teach in any depth to undergraduates, only to postgraduates. As I said, he worked with Hilbert.
Education can get in your way, I don't deny that, but I would say it's because if you have a teacher who has a particularly eclectic way of looking at something you might end up having a bad understanding of a topic because the lesson didn't make much sense. More than once I've been reading a textbook and said outloud "So
that is what that means!!" and thought "Why did Professor [Something] teach it in such a convoluted way". Doesn't mean I would have been better off not going to his classes at all. It would be cutting off your nose to spite your face.
But cranks, nuts, conspiracy theorists and idiots (feel free to wonder which I might associate you with) use quotes of Einstein saying "Imagination is more important than knowledge" to give them an excuse for having
no knowledge. All imagination and no knowledge is
worse than having no imagination and tons of knowledge because at least the person lacking imagination can be given a problem and told "Apply this method, give me the results". Someone with no knowledge won't even understand the problem. I'm sure you don't understand zero point energy in quantum field theory, nor would you understand the AdS/CFT description of repelling singularities. Yet you're happy to claim ZPE and antigravity are within our ability to prove exist. When was the last time you read a physics textbook or a physics journal? For me it's been however long this post has taken me to type.