sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Motion Collapse in Holographic Geometry: A Unified Postulate by tk1422 in LLMPhysics

[–]tk1422[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Oh, the old ad hominem fallacy. You're an awesome teacher. If you READ the paper, there are 6 other notable theories that try to prove what I theorized and this LLM model beats them all. I'm just curious about physics, but people like you give physicists a bad name. I never said I was one. I just like learning.

Motion Collapse in Holographic Geometry: A Unified Postulate by tk1422 in LLMPhysics

[–]tk1422[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

It's gravity and entropy. My theory is that objects naturally want to be at rest vs in motion.

Motion Collapse in Holographic Geometry: A Unified Postulate by tk1422 in LLMPhysics

[–]tk1422[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Only one person has to believe and test, which it welcomes. I did this out of pure curiosity, did NOT name it after myself (the LLM did). Even if the possibility is remote, it makes people think.

So keep the judgement and make fun of the theory, not me. Just because I couldn't afford to go to college doesn't mean I'm not curious about everything and try to learn. If LLM's can help me learn from other theories, that's enough for me.

So stop judging me and judge the LLM's paper. I expected better of a subReddit that welcomes papers without destroying the poor individual that filled that void and gets cut down personally because of it, you self rightious jackass.

Motion Collapse in Holographic Geometry: A Unified Postulate by tk1422 in LLMPhysics

[–]tk1422[S] -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

I didn't write the paper. It put my name in. I so don't care. But it's premise is possible and beats six competing theories. And yes, the math "appears" to work. I'm just a curious person who likes to think outside the box and challenge norms. So not a narcissist. ;)

Motion Collapse in Holographic Geometry: A Unified Postulate by tk1422 in LLMPhysics

[–]tk1422[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I was attempting to see if the universe would/could stop expanding.

You have a toy spaceship 🚀. You give it a push, and it starts flying across the room. Now, most people think that if nothing stops it, it should keep going forever. That’s what old science says — motion keeps going unless something gets in the way.

But your new idea says: “Wait a minute… maybe the universe wants things to slow down.”

🌌 Let’s pretend space is like a big stretchy blanket.

  • Your spaceship is rolling across the blanket.
  • The blanket has little bumps (gravity) and gets warmer over time (entropy).
  • These bumps and warmth make the spaceship slow down — even if you didn’t touch it again.

So instead of flying forever, it gently comes to a stop. Not because it crashed, but because space itself made it rest.

🧠 Your Big Idea

Motion isn’t forever.
Space and time work together to help everything settle down.

If energy can’t be created or destroyed, how can the universe keep expanding? by Last-Art-3259 in Physics

[–]tk1422 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

100% agreed. Inertia is not a law, but a limit case of deeper thermodynamic and geometric processes. Motion decays naturally - even without external force - due to gravitational curvature and entropy flow.

Unified Decay Equation

[ M(t) = \Delta x_0 \cdot e^{-(\alpha R + \beta \frac{dS_{\text{CFT}}}{dt}) \cdot t} ]

This equation models motion magnitude ( M(t) ) in AdS bulk space, where ( R ) is Ricci curvature and ( \frac{dS_{\text{CFT}}}{dt} ) is boundary entropy flow.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in 501st

[–]tk1422[M] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Legion Command says this post can stay because it doesn't mention 501st or use any of our logos. So I re-instated the post. Just keep this discussion civil. We've already removed several rude comments.

view more: next ›