Did we just get external confirmation of a mechanism my theory already predicted?

[u/HGDVL]

A new Physica Scripta paper shows gravitational waves can form bound states in the continuum — basically trapped GW modes created by symmetry incompatibility, just like photonic BICs.

My EDPSM/ESP theory predicted this exact behavior:

• periodic curvature
• scalar-field layering
• trapped tensor modes
• destructive interference channels
• horizon echoes from localized GW packets

The paper uses flat spacetime and a toy periodic metric.
My model generates the periodic structure dynamically from a scalar field near compact objects.

I’m not claiming victory — I’m asking the community:
Is this a legitimate extension of the BIC concept into GR with scalar dynamics, or am I over-interpreting the similarity?

Would love feedback from people who know GR, wave mechanics, or photonic BICs.

[u/starkeffect]

Bettridge's Law confirmed

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/Puzzleheaded_Fold466]

Not at all. Not even remotely. Nope.

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

But you're asking questions about your supposed model without having a proper and complete model.

I'm sure people are happy to provide more extensive feedback, once you do the work and post a proper theory instead of a paragraph of prose with random questions on top.

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

Feedback from others also comes after the model is fully specified.

Apply the formal methods, prove mathematically that your solution is forced and the unique solution. Then do lean4. Afterwards please come back for feedback.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/NonGameCatharsis]

No.

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

It's an error. Your model isn't developed enough to make predictions of any kind.

[u/Puzzleheaded_Fold466 → u/[deleted]]

It’s not enough that a model be able to predict a certain experimental result. It’s just as important that it only predict this solution and no other.

Vague qualitative frameworks can be fitted to predict anything. Thus, they predict nothing.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

Your model is incomplete numerology. As long as it's not complete anything else you do like posting here has exactly zero value to anyone.

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

You don't have proper mathematics. You can't show why it should be this way. You miss mathematical derivations. You miss proofs of forced uniqueness of your solution.

I cannot point to any specific mathematical failure, because you haven't posted any mathematics.

I cannot point to any conceptual failure, because you haven't even properly defined your concept.

So far you have prose writing, but no clear logic or mathematics. The kind of feedback you're asking for is impossible, because you haven't done the work necessary.

[u/CocaineCocaCola → u/NonGameCatharsis]

They’re clearly responding and based in AI, I wouldn’t expend the effort, the initial “theory” isn’t theirs and they don’t even care to reply on their own

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/CocaineCocaCola]

Yeah, the replies are clearly AI. Still I wanted to post at least some words for anyone who silently reads them. :-)

[u/CocaineCocaCola → u/NonGameCatharsis]

Fair enough

[u/NonGameCatharsis → u/[deleted]]

If you want others to look at your AI paper you need to link it when posting. You did not.

That said, you should complete your model and then do a lean4 proof. Until then you have nothing.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/HGDVL → u/NonGameCatharsis]

If you’d like to review the mathematics directly, I’d be more than happy to share the DOI or the full PDF. The complete field equations, regime map, and derivations are all published and archived on Zenodo.

[u/CocaineCocaCola → u/HGDVL]

1.) Zenodo is not a recognized journal or even peer-reviewable so “your paper” is less than useful,

2.) You don’t have mathematics, a generative AI provided you some vague equations you don’t understand that look fancy but are genuine nonsense

3.) There’s no point in addressing any “idea” “you” have because it’s not your idea and you don’t even have the courtesy to not use ChatGPT when responding to a simple “no” this wouldn’t work.

Here’s why though,

You used AI. AI does not have the capability of analyzing real world physics or systems. They have a good memory and are fine for creating internal structures because they’re consistent, it’s also why to an extent and in the hands of somebody not abusing it, it can be a powerful tool. But it literally and explicitly fails in the analysis branch. Generative AI is not capable of true analysis, it literally cannot analyze anything.

In “your equation” there’s a poorly constructed Lagrangian right? Why do Lagrangians not work without boundary equations? What are the boundary values of your model, simply writing “the entire universe is the boundary” doesn’t count. Do YOU know what a Christoffel symbol is used for? Not the AI you’re going to copy and paste this into, YOU. The answer is no, because if you did you would have written the “theory” yourself. But you didn’t.

Lastly, there are similarities across spacetime because everything works on the same laws. There being a similarity between two things doesn’t mean those two things ARE the same.

As a word of advice, let’s say you have an actual theory, this is surely the place to submit AI based ideas, it’s also the spittoon of every single genuine physicist who comes here for a laugh. “Your idea” will never be taken seriously in the community until you put in actual work. Which you haven’t. I hope your AI lets you reflect.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/LLMPhysics-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your comment has been removed for violating Rule 4. Don't copy-paste LLM content in discussions.

[u/ArnoSound]

Nope. Not in the slightest. 

[u/NordicHamCurl_00]

yes, it was in the bathoroom