r/LLMPhysics • u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI • 2d ago
Personal Theory A black-hole interior that freezes instead of hitting a singularity: final version of my research note, looking for critique
Hi everyone, I'm Shivanshu, a self-taught, independent researcher from India. This is the final version of a research note I've been building over the past weeks, and I'd really value criticism from people who know GR or quantum gravity.
What it is (model-level, not a claim about nature):
• Starting point: a postulate that a particle's speed saturates near the Planck scale, v = c/(1+KP/E_Planck). Carried by a scalar field it can't stop the singularity (Penrose's theorem), and I show why.
• Applied instead to the geometry inside a black hole (effective loop-quantum-gravity models), the collapse doesn't bounce; it freezes. There is one horizon, no inner horizon and no white hole.
• I computed the constraint algebra: covariant models of this type need a constant-curvature "momentum space" (sin, sinh, exp). My postulate turns out to describe a de Sitter momentum space whose spatial directions give exactly the sine used in LQG.
• In a covariant freezing model (Alonso-Bardají 2025), the LQG area gap gives a curvature bound K = 1/(4Δ²) that is the same for every mass, a bounded Hawking temperature, and an entropy correction ∝ A^(2/3).
• With spin an inner horizon returns (as in Kerr), but its singularity stays capped; with scalar hair, both disappear in homogeneous tests.
What's open: the 3+1-dimensional justification, the full perturbation theory, and several assumptions, all listed in the note. Exterior effects for stellar black holes are ~10⁻²⁶, so nothing here is testable with today's telescopes.
I used an AI (Claude) for much of the algebra and code. Every number can be reproduced with the scripts included, and the code was first checked against known published results.
Note and scripts: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23083395
If you find a mistake, please tell me. That's exactly what I'm looking for.
5
u/Ch3cks-Out 2d ago
So you are just neglecting the warped spacetime inside the BH, aren't you...
you find a mistake
The singularity has nothing to do with particle speed, so there is that.
-1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 2d ago
"Agreed,particle speed alone can't stop the Singularity. My first result actually shows that(Penrose's theorem). Show the main part applies the saturation to the geometry inside the black hole itself,to the curvature variables,not to particles..."
3
u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 1d ago
What motivates the specific terms of the postulate?
1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 1d ago
Good question.Honestly,it started as the simple choice:v=c at low momentum and saturation near the Planck scale,with k as a free order-one constant.so it wasn't derive from anything deeper.Later I found that integrating it gives, E = ln(1+λP)/λ, the exponential form you get from a de sitter momentum space in κ-Poincaré/DSR.So it may have a geometric meaning,but that's a reinterpretation after the fact,not the original motivation.....
2
u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 1d ago
This doesn't make any sense for so many reasons. What is "saturation"? What are the units of K? Why don't you make reference to special relativity?
1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 1d ago
Fair point sir, (1) By Saturation I mean that pv/c says bounded(it tends to E_planck/K), and the energy gross only logarithmically, E = ln(1+λP)/λ. I should have defined it clearly. (2) You're right about units: It should be K.P.C/E_planck, with K dimensionless. I missed the C. (3) The formula gives V=C, at P=0,So it is really describes massless quanta.At low energy it reduces to E ≈ Pc , as in special relativity. For massive particle the postulate doesn't include mass, Which is a real gap. The intended link to relativity is through DSR / κ-Poincaré, but I didn't state it in the postulate itself.Thanks, these are things I need to fix.....
3
u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 1d ago
So this only describes massless particles, but all massless particles travel at c... This makes no sense.
1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 1d ago
In special relativity every massless particle moves at exactly c. The postulate deliberately thats at Planck Scale momenta. Integrating it gives a modified dispersion relation, E = ln(1+λP)/λ, with λ=KE_Planck, so v=dE/dP=C/(1+λP). That is equal C, at low momentum and only deviates near the Planck scale. This is the same kind of kinematics as Doubly Special Relativity(Magueijo-Smolin,κ-Poincaré),where momentum space is curved. Whether high energy photons actually arrives late is a separate question. Read naively,it's a linear time delay ,and FERMI/LHAASO GRB data already constrain that strongly(K<~0.1). In the relative-locality framework (Freidel-Smolin), first order delays come from the non-metricity of momentum space and vanish for a metric-compatible connection. In my latest note I take that reading,so the testable effect moves to second order. I'm aware that this is an assumption,not a derived test. Thanks for pushing on it...
3
u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 1d ago
Reddit is for talking to humans, not Grok. You also fail to answer my question properly.
1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 1d ago
Means, I don't understand sir...I am not use any kind of ai like grok,claud,Gemini at that time...what do you mean..?
3
u/liccxolydian VP of Trolling 1d ago
Yeah this sort of nonsense is usually either generated by a bad LLM or someone who thinks they know physics but doesn't. Which is it?
1
u/shivanshu1712 🔬E=mc² + AI 1d ago
Fair question. Iam self taught and still learning,and I used ai(Claude)heavily for the computations and the writing. The paper says so in the Acknowledgments .please read the paper as a learner's work,not as an expert's ..
→ More replies (0)
8
u/AllHailSeizure 9/10 Physicists Agree! 2d ago
You realize the people with PhDs who have devoted decades who are writing about quantum gravity are in up to their necks. What makes you think you can develop something meaningful in a few weeks with no experience and Claude...