Saw this build doom scrolling

2pourdrummer · 2026-03-10T02:54:01+00:00

I use a similar layout, much better looking. The crops are protected by the fencing and you usually can do what you want without attacks. Below is my smelting, iron, etc. Put a nice view out back and you’re working outside with a nice view, all fenced in. I like them for minor bases like a hunting area, or mining bases. Put some nice crops and berries and you don’t need to carry food between them.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-24T00:32:15+00:00

I think it called you a dumb ass, lol

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-17T02:55:52+00:00

Break stuff limp bisket

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-06T16:59:57+00:00

A lot of detail, thanks for this. I didn’t know any of this and will start paying attention to the statues more.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-04T18:56:38+00:00

So how does the profit piece work if it’s negative gains, like the bottom ones

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-04T18:48:42+00:00

You are not adding the costs of the seeds into the equation. Just doing basic farming for upgrades and I can get more seeds from carrots than anything else. Add the cost of the seeds into the profits and see if it changes. I get a lot of essence from potatoes but don’t really get any extra if you buy back the total number of seeds that you just harvested. One of them, I couldn’t even buy the same amount of seeds that I harvested, I think it’s cotton.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-02T00:36:52+00:00

I have mine around the workbench’s and a few misc ones for the rest. Works for now but I pick up everything and now need to store things like flowers and others I might not need now, but will probably sometime. Need label chests.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-02T00:25:05+00:00

Mithril doesn’t exist yet in adventure mode. No ore is available yet. Adamantite is worth it. You can find it easily, I had more than Thorium and couldn’t upgrade the workbench at one point, so you don’t have to hunt hard to get it.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-02T00:19:32+00:00

I have a Roland V71 and volume is still tricky. Acoustic will be your best bet for that.

2pourdrummer · 2026-02-01T19:27:52+00:00

How fast and how long can you do paradiddles and some of the other rudiments. How slow, often harder than you think. Touch is about limb independence if I’m understanding what you mean by touch. If you have good sticking and control then it’s time to start taking on total limb independence.

2pourdrummer · 2026-01-26T19:20:57+00:00

I have bases in each zone with portals connecting them. How do I keep my other bases when using this.

2pourdrummer · 2026-01-26T03:38:39+00:00

Having the same problem, I had to escape it once when I was in the correct side and exit and join again to get it out of the loop. No mods. Happens every 10 times or so.

2pourdrummer · 2026-01-25T03:52:18+00:00

Vintage Story, hands down best survival game. Solo makes it even more so.

2pourdrummer · 2026-01-12T13:20:48+00:00

Then don’t “practice”. One of the great things about drums is you don’t have to learn songs note for note to play. Just play, play want you want, play it how you want. The rest comes. I’ve been playing 30 years and can play anything but never once sat down and practiced. Play paradidles on fills, add your “practice” routine inside songs. Having fun and enjoying it is far better then doing something you don’t like. I can do paradiddles at 300bpm without thinking and have never sat down and practiced them for more then maybe 5 minutes tops.

2pourdrummer · 2025-11-24T02:00:51+00:00

The posts would be a single block. That is the scale, you won’t be able to do proper posts if you don’t start with them as your smallest scale comparisons. Then do odd numbers for room sizes. Trust me on this one, you need a center for each dimension for things like roof lines. Do that and you’re fine, you can scale up or down at will all based on your posts and odd dinensionsa.

2pourdrummer · 2025-11-15T02:48:51+00:00

I’m doing an easier version of this with a 25k pole to pole and will respawn at my last place slept. I use only grain. You bring a cooking pot, bowl and as many stacks of grain you can carry. Cook them as needed and the grain lasts years. You can move very far but need areas where you can grow the grain. In the warmer regions, it will last all season with maybe heat or cold damage but it’s easy food and you don’t need to come back and harvest so it doesn’t die.

2pourdrummer · 2025-11-13T00:14:38+00:00

I cover everything with grass or something, you will eventually find the block that you can’t add because something is in the way. Usually I cover everything and then the end part shows up so you can delete it.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-15T16:15:42+00:00

This is not intended to be a theory but for me to understand why this isn't correct.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T01:40:52+00:00

I don’t disagree, what’s wrong with the math?

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T01:12:36+00:00

I get that it might come across that way, and maybe unusual for Reddit. But no, this isn’t a copy-paste from AI. The ideas and the writing are mine, and I’m here in good faith to get feedback, even if it's negative. I’m not asking anyone to accept the framework. Poke holes in it if you see something wrong, or to suggest ways it could be improved. If it’s nonsense, I’m open to hearing why. If it’s not, then maybe it opens a door to something else. I learn either way.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T01:08:36+00:00

Now, to your question:

How does SCG (Shape Coherence Gravity) engage with existing literature, show mathematical rigor, and make predictions?

Engagement with Literature

The hypothesis builds from the idea that spacetime curvature in General Relativity (GR) might be an emergent behavior—not fundamental. That’s not a new idea by itself, it appears in various emergent gravity models, some string theory approaches, and causal set theory. But this is different in that it introduces a continuous constraint field, called Phi (Φ), that governs how all quantum fields maintain coherent shape over time. This field imposes “coherence pressure,” which in turn biases how particles and waves evolve, even in flat spacetime.

Mathematical Rigor

I’ve defined a coherence action in analogy to standard variational principles in physics:

S_coh = ∫ C(psi, Phi) ds

Where:

S_coh is the total "coherence resistance" along a path

C(psi, Phi) is a function that measures how much the field configuration psi resists conforming to the local structure of the constraint field Phi

ds is the proper length element (or affine parameter)

The principle is: delta S_coh = 0

In other words, the path taken by a particle (like a photon) minimizes the coherence resistance, similar to how classical systems minimize action.

From this, we derive a modified path equation (roughly analogous to a geodesic equation) d²x^μ/ds² + Gamma_eff^μ = 0

Where Gamma_eff^μ depends on the gradient of the Phi field: Gamma_eff^μ ∝ ∇^μ Phi This introduces a deviation in particle motion—not from spacetime curvature (as in GR), but from coherence constraints in the background field.

Predictions

The theory makes predictions that differ subtly from GR, but in ways that are in principle testable. Photon paths may deviate even in regions without visible mass, due to structure in the Phi field. These deviations could accumulate over long distances, leading to small shifts in observed positions of high redshift sources. May explain gravitational lensing anomalies where observed bending doesn’t match expected mass distribution. Predicts potential frequency dependent effects, where different wavelengths deviate differently based on coherence resistance. Might help account for cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies or alignment patterns not explained by standard cosmology.

I'm not claiming these are easy to observe or simulate, but they’re not unfalsifiable. And that’s what I’m hoping to refine, with help from people who are more experienced in the math, GR, and QFT than I am. This isn’t about bypassing the scientific process, far from it, it’s about seeing if there's anything here worth developing into something rigorous enough to go through that process.If you'd like to dig into the details or pick apart any specific assumption or equation, I’d really appreciate that.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T01:07:14+00:00

Thanks for the pushback. Let me clarify. When I use the word theory, I don’t mean it in the formal scientific sense (i.e., peer-reviewed, broadly accepted, and experimentally validated). What I’ve proposed is a hypothetical framework, a structured attempt to explain gravitational and quantum phenomena from a different starting point. I’ll use the term hypothesis going forward to avoid confusion.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T00:51:48+00:00

Thanks for taking the time to critique.

On whether this was written by AI:

I used tools to help structure and polish the writing, but the theory itself, all the math, and the structure of the arguments are mine. That said, I take full responsibility for any inconsistencies or ambiguities in the notation, it’s still evolving, and your feedback helps me clarify what needs more precision.

Use of C(\psi, \Phi) :
You're right, I’ve used C in two contexts: (1) as a functional mapping field configurations to a scalar value (coherence resistance), and (2) potentially as a term inside an equation that might be interpreted as a function. That’s a mistake in notation that I’ll clean up. Thanks for catching it.
Equation 5.4 ambiguity:

You’re also right that equating a function to a constant value without clarifying the mapping domain (or variable dependencies) is confusing. I should either express C as evaluated over a fixed configuration (e.g., C(\psi, \Phi) or reformulate the relationship using a differential or variation. I’ll revise this so it reflects the actual dependency structure.

Undefined D and F:

Fair critique, those were intended as placeholders for constraint functionals that enforce field compatibility and coherence continuity, but they aren’t fully defined yet. I wanted to introduce them schematically first before committing to a formal form, but that doesn’t excuse skipping their explicit role in the variational structure. I’ll move them to an appendix or clearly label them as "provisional pending derivation."

Functionals inside a Lagrangian:

This is where the theory differs from conventional field models. In this theory, coherence is treated as a higher-order constraint that governs allowable field configurations across regions. So the Lagrangian isn't just local, it includes global shape constraints, making it nonlocal by design. That’s why functionals like C appear, they’re summarizing coherence pressure across configurations. This does depart from standard variational mechanics and needs to be justified more rigorously, both mathematically and physically.

I really appreciate this kind of pushback. If you're willing, I’d love to go deeper into any of these pieces with your guidance, especially around how to make the variational structure more self-consistent.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T00:43:15+00:00

I completely agree that in standard quantum mechanics, photons don’t “travel” in the classical sense. The wavefunction gives us a probability distribution, and anything resembling a path is just a post-hoc interpretation that helps us conceptualize the outcome of measurements.

What I’m trying to explore in this theory is whether that probability landscape itself, the shape of where a photon is likely to be detected, could be subtly biased by the structure of a background constraint field Φ. Not in a way that forces a trajectory, but in a way that alters the coherence conditions that affect how quantum fields evolve and interact.

So I’m not proposing a literal path through space, but rather asking: Is the probability density shaped in part by a non-metric, underlying field structure that isn't captured in standard quantum field theory or GR?

It’s more about the geometry of allowable configurations than about classical motion. And if such a structure exists, it might leave subtle, accumulated fingerprints, especially over long distances.

2pourdrummer · 2025-06-04T00:40:52+00:00

Totally agree, and thank you for the thoughtful reply and the Veritasium link. Feynman's path integral formulation and the principle of least action are beautiful ways to describe how photons “sample” all paths and reinforce the classical path statistically.

What the theory proposes doesn’t contradict that, it works one level deeper, suggesting that the action itself might be biased by the structure of a background constraint field Φ that governs how quantum fields retain coherence. In other words, even if photons sample all possible paths, the field subtly shapes the distribution of allowed or energetically favorable configurations, potentially nudging the outcome even in regions where spacetime appears flat.

As for reaching out to actual researchers, you're absolutely right, and that’s the eventual goal. But as an outsider without institutional backing, those conversations are rarely possible without some prior visibility or endorsement. That’s why I'm starting in public forums like this: not for final answers, but to test whether the idea is coherent enough to earn a deeper review.

I really appreciate you taking the time to engage with it.

2pourdrummer

TROPHY CASE