Genocide normalization

Putin: “Hey, Trump. You’re really smart and can use computers. AI will totally revolutionize your national defense. Trust me, bro.”

Elon: “Hey… Yeah, totally.”

I’m running really promising (infant) simulations on my computer. The void is a concept, not a physical reality (my hypothesis which has no evidence, as of yet), and that actually leads to a sort of “bounce” or reactive (rather than active) physical law. The word salad sorters aren’t going to dismantle our false premises. Might as well write letters asking Santa for scientific advancement.

Lol. You’re right. I’ll try to be more careful

Getting fucked up before going to work? Hell yeah. Shaking and sweating by noon? Not so fun.

You mean the original turn coats?

Girls is the devil

Pretty sure it’s so giving ketchup to school kids constitutes a serving of vegetables.

Carl Sagan, Neil Tyson, Dora the Explorer. All very important. Be interested in things.

Stephen Hawking fell into the same role in his later years. If your first introduction to him was trying to communicate science to stupid people, please read Black Holes and Baby Universes, or really, any of his works before he was getting ready to die.

Rude

Edit: Oh wait. I didn’t know lemmyworld was the satire part. My bad. I don’t know where I am

Simulated parameters in my laptop. Sorry.

Good question!

PET Voids vs. Standard Model (SM) Particles: Our 1D “voids” are simplified analogues – think of them as toy models for what fundamental particles might be at a deeper level. SM particles (like electrons) are much more complex, described by quantum fields, and have properties like charge and spin that our 1D voids don’t explicitly have yet.

“Passing Through” – Wave Nature is Key:

If you think of particles as tiny hard balls, them passing through each other sounds odd. But in quantum mechanics, all particles also behave like waves. And waves (like ripples on a pond or light beams) do pass through each other all the time. This is a better analogy for what we’re seeing.

The structures in our PET model are behaving like solitons, which are special, very stable wave packets that are known for their ability to pass through each other and maintain their identity.

How Do SM Particles “Pass Through”?

Weakly Interacting Particles: Something like a neutrino interacts so weakly it can pass through the entire Earth. This is “passing through” due to a tiny chance of hitting anything.

Photons (Light): Light beams pass through each other without issue.

Strongly Interacting Particles (e.g., Protons, Electrons): When these “collide,” they typically scatter due to the fundamental forces between them (electromagnetism, strong force). They don’t usually pass through each other unchanged like our PET solitons do in these 1D simulations. Their interactions are more about exchanging force particles and changing trajectories, or even creating new particles.

Is This PET Behavior “Observed” or “Testable Soon”?

Directly, No: We can’t find these specific 1D ether voids in a lab experiment. They are part of our theoretical model.

Indirectly/Conceptually: The idea of particles being soliton-like excitations of an underlying field or medium is explored in various areas of theoretical physics (e.g., some models for magnetic monopoles, or structures in Bose-Einstein condensates). So, the concept of soliton-like entities is well-established.

Testing PET: For PET itself to be testable, we need to develop it much further (especially into 3D) to see if it can make predictions that match real-world observations or, even better, predict something new that experimenters could look for. That’s a very long-term goal.

In essence: The soliton-like “pass-through” in our 1D PET model is exciting because it shows our simple ether can produce structures with very robust, non-trivial, particle-like interaction properties (maintaining identity after collision). This is a key behavior we’d want our particle analogues to have. While it’s not a direct match for how all Standard Model particles interact (especially strongly interacting ones), the wave-like nature and the concept of stable, extended structures are important themes in fundamental physics. Our current work is about seeing if these themes can emerge naturally from a single ether.

Hope this helps clarify!

Man, people are so fatalistic and utopian in their world views. The fact is that we are beautiful, wretched, capable creatures, and life is a fight. People are gonna beat you down, and the world is gonna shit all over you. Whether we’re watching people do their fucking war games and playing monopoly with the world, we rise up and punch a bitch in the face when he fucks with us. Anarchism is a way of being, and we’re clever as fuck. We’re gonna work this shit out and jump over hurdles and get into ugly arguments and love our family right. We can convolute this shit and try to work out the fantasy worlds we would love to live in - at the end of the day, we try to fill our bellies and be loved. And 9 times out of ten, you’re not arguing with the world, you’re failing to confront yourself. How do prevent hierarchy? We fucking stand up to bullies, protect ourselves, and treat our women right. Feel me?

Enshittification

https://www.earthtouchnews.com/in-the-field/in-the-field/in-photos-drunk-mountain-gorilla-punches-wildlife-photographer/

I wanna be a gorilla field researcher. They’re cool. I saw a video where a wildlife photographer was following a gorilla too close, and you’re like, “that animal is fuck this guy up”, right? Nah. The gorilla punches him in the face and keeps walking.

This is a foundational model, and like many early-stage theories, it begins by proposing a new framework rather than conforming to existing ones. The “equations from thin air” are not arbitrary—they emerge from a single principle: tension (pressure differential) as the driver of emergence. This principle is explored through both simulation and recursive analysis.

The framework does not assume fundamental particles or fields—it posits emergence from imbalance itself. Pressure and tension in this context are not analogies but descriptors of system instability across recursive layers. That’s precisely why dimensionality and structure unfold as outcomes, not inputs.

As for units, I agree this needs refinement, and I’m in the process of standardizing definitions and dimensional analysis across the paper. That’s part of transitioning from raw model to publishable form.

And yes—the parameters are currently tuned manually. This is an early simulation stage. You’re right to challenge that. But early-stage models, from cosmology to climate science, begin with manual parameter fitting to find viable behaviors. The next step is automation, testing against empirical datasets, and refining the bounds of those parameters.

Thank you for your feedback. I’ll prepare a LaTeX version with full mathematical notation.

deleted by creator