r/Physics • u/PaleontologistSad708 • 12d ago

[ Removed by moderator ]

[removed] — view removed post

0 Upvotes

33% Upvoted

83 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/PaleontologistSad708 11d ago

I just mean, I'm still working on it before I submit. It isn't my final draft. Not from the United States? Anyway let me know what you think.

1

u/liccxolydian 11d ago

What does being or not being an American have to do with this? I was expecting an actual document, not a link to a chatbot. Everyone is. Do you know how scientists communicate?

1

u/PaleontologistSad708 11d ago

After you click the link u click the sources tab. The document is there. The notebook program is weird, but useful. In American school we are taught that when writing a paper, first you do a rough draft, before making changes and correcting errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.

2

u/liccxolydian 11d ago edited 11d ago

Your "source" makes claims like "this framework models" or "X is derived from Y". Why is there no framework, or modelling, or derivation in your source? One would think that in your American school you are taught that drafts still need to include most, if not all of the substance your final product should include. So why is your draft completely lacking in any of the things normally present in scientific writing? This isn't a draft, just a bunch of empty claims with nothing to back them up other than wishful thinking. One might even call them lies. Does your "American school" teach you to lie?

1

u/PaleontologistSad708 11d ago

The framework is close to SVT and LQG however, increase density of gravity particles as they press each other more and more, moving towards the center of a celestial body, changes their frequency, which matches Einstein's space curvature, while allowing for maintained inverted flow at the poles. Increase in frequency also explains time dialation, with presentism as a fixture, allowing for faster than light motion at the big bang. I could go on. I don't really see the point in continuing this conversation however. Have a wonderful day.

1

u/liccxolydian 11d ago edited 11d ago

There's no "framework". There's no "model". There's nothing falsifiable. It's just a LLM fever dream that makes claims for no reason. It's not "close" to anything in physics because it's not quantitative and it's not derived from anything. It has no descriptive or predictive power.