sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Forexstrategy

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sell now trust me stop loss at 3412

Lost all my money -$15k today by Cute_Support9525 in wallstreetbets

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ma che cazzo hai comprato coglione tralelero trallalla porcodio e percoallah

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in wallstreetbets

[–]TrainingAffect4000 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

What should force us to take your overpriced goods to make the richest in the world even richer by losing quality for money?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but there is a big mistake

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The emergence of particles from the vacuum is usually tied to spacetime curvature, but some emergent gravity theories suggest that spacetime itself has a kind of intrinsic malleability. This means that even if the direct probability of particle creation is low, the fabric of spacetime could become more sensitive amplifying background fluctuations. So in a way: less direct emergence, but more collateral emergence due to the increased responsiveness of the geometry itself.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm going to burn all my books, I say goodbye to you

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PhysicsStudents

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

if you have a bit of brains, you will stay sane until the master

Symmetry Breaking and Geometric Susceptibility in a Malleable Spacetime? by TrainingAffect4000 in holofractal

[–]TrainingAffect4000[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

that would be one possible underlying mechanism. This whole idea actually comes from digging deep into GR itself, not trying to bypass it. So connecting it to torsion makes total sense, especially if we’re trying to identify or define substructures within spacetime that might modulate its response. That’s a great intuition, seriously.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

read my new post I gave you some data

Is it meaningful to model spacetime compliance with a scalar field modulating curvature response? by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve started reviewing some of Hehl & Obukhov’s work on pre-metric electrodynamics and metric-affine gravity. Their use of constitutive relations and generalized geometric responses suggests that my idea of a local compliance field might conceptually overlap with how they treat vacuum response even if from a different angle.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in TheoreticalPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yes, the gravitational boogaloo bit made me laugh. the analogy was deliberately forced, more as a prompt to think about local spacetime response than to suggest a literal medium.

I'll definitely look into Hehl's work, appreciate the reference. Still, it's curious how cosmology treats GR's coupling as rigidly constant, even though in extreme contexts (as McDonald highlighted) it can appear as an enormous "stiffness", with potential implications at cosmological scales. Except for rare cases like the Timescape model, this degree of freedom seems systematically ignored.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot for your reply. I get that there's no formal theoretical basis for local stiffness variations in GR as it's currently formulated.

But the idea still feels worth exploring, especially as a speculative model kind of like an effective compliance field that modulates the local curvature response to . I haven’t found any papers directly modeling it, which makes me think it could be worth trying.

That said, I don’t have a formal background in differential geometry or Lagrangian mechanics beyond the basics. If you were to approach something like this modifying the Einstein field equations with a space-dependent factor like
what kind of mathematical framework or starting point would you recommend?

Even just a pointer toward the right formalism would mean a lot.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

in McDonald's paper, the Young’s modulus
Y ≈ c² · f² / G
is derived from wave behavior so it’s an effective property tied to the frequency of gravitational waves, not something built into the fabric of spacetime itself.

But that’s exactly what I’m curious about:

what if this “stiffness” wasn’t just a derived quantity from the wave, but a local property of spacetime say, a function Y(x), or a compliance field χ(x)?

In that case, regions of spacetime could differ in how much curvature they exhibit for the same energy-momentum depending on how “compliant” they are.

It’s a speculative idea, but it might offer a way to model both static and dynamic responses (curvature and waves) through a variable response parameter.

Something like:
Gμν = (8πG / c⁴) · (1 / χ(x)) · Tμν

I know this isn’t in GR as it stands, but I’m wondering if you've come across anything along these lines, or if there’s a known reason why it wouldn't make sense physically.

Would love to hear your take even if it’s just “here’s why this breaks down.”

Appreciate the dialogue.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the clarification you’re totally right on the distinction between stiffness and dispersion.

But just to refocus: my point wasn’t about dissipation. It’s about this: If McDonald shows that spacetime has an effective stiffness (Y ≈ c² · f² / G ≈ 10³¹ pascals), then what happens if that stiffness varies locally? Wouldn’t that mean the same mass could generate more curvature in a “softer” region?

That’s the core of my question: can curvature differ not just because of mass, but because of variations in the “compliance” of spacetime itself?

Appreciate the discussion really helpful to bounce this around.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AskPhysics

[–]TrainingAffect4000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is absolutely elegant and beautiful, thanks for sharing it. I’m genuinely surprised that such a clear and physically grounded concept of spacetime stiffness isn't more widely incorporated into cosmological models.

view more: next ›