Did Michael Darius Eastwood discover three new laws of nature?
No, and the site says so in its own first minutes: “I have not found a new law of nature. Three papers propose one and it is unproven.” Three laws are named as proposals, none is presented as established, and the exponent d/(d+1) is prior work by groups with no connection to the author.
Three laws are named on this site, the ARC Equation, the ARC Co-Scaling Law and the ARC Ceiling, and every one is a proposal: stated, dated and unproven, each published beside the result that would refute it. Naming a proposed law is how a proposal becomes testable and killable; it is not a claim that the law is established. The laws page states what each would take to fail, and the falsification record reproduces every such condition verbatim, dated and hashed.
One registered claim has already died by its own test. The early estimate of 2.24, the most striking number the programme ever produced, was retracted in public when cross-architecture replication did not support it, and the robust estimate near 0.49 is printed with its interval every time it appears. A programme constructing a grandiose discovery story does not typically publish the failure of its best number and leave the retraction standing.
The famous mathematics is credited away, not claimed: “The exponent d/(d+1) was independently derived, repeatedly, by groups with no connection to me, and is not mine.” What the programme claims is narrower: the naming, the dating, a proposed explanation of why the independent derivations converge, and one measured result carrying a wide interval. The register of what this site does not claim lists every common misattribution with its verbatim source.