6 ms·

Recursive Becoming: Theory of Everything

11 points by dvcoolster 1y ago

breakyerself 1y ago
I'm not an expert in any of this, but it just sounds crackpot to me. Like someone trying to make a unified theory of the universe as being a self building steam engine in 1885 or something.
dvcoolster 1y ago
Full PDF: https://rbtzero.github.io/rbt/RBT_v1.0_release.pdf https://rbtzero.github.io/rbt/RBT_v1.0_release.pdf Public Repository: https://github.com/rbtzero/rbt https://github.com/rbtzero/rbt
hamburga 1y ago
Seems like a fellow traveler with the Wolfram Model of physics. But they’re also making falsifiable predictions. According to Gemini 2.5 Pro: “Based on the content of the provided PDF, "RBT_v1.0_release.pdf," the research presented is not connected to the Wolfram Model. Regarding experimental results and falsifiable predictions, the document explicitly states that the theory of "Recursive Becoming" is falsifiable. It further outlines six concrete, parameter-free predictions that are intended to be testable before the year 2030: * Test 1: Ring-aperture X-ray line (XRISM) * Test 2: Axial-lepton phase shift (MAGIS-100) * Test 3: EDM sign (CASPEr) * Test 4: Missing-energy bump (Super-Charm) * Test 5: Curvature waveguide loss * Test 6: Immersive VR power budget” We just need to have some art and theology in place by 2030 to make human sense of this :)
- dvcoolster 1y ago
  It's actually right away, XRISM can check it. We are writing to them for detecting the neutral knot
voxl 1y ago
This heavily trips the crackpot index: 1. Zero understanding about the philosophy of mathematics 2. Asking the public and AI models for peer review instead of the scientific community via publication at a physics conference 3. Association with blockchain NTFs a known "technology" whose only application is grifting 4. The very first comment is yet another appeal to an LLM to attempt to understand the gibberish The world is doomed, I've not hated people more than I do now. If you use LLMs for anything above a stochastic autocomplete I don't consider you a professional or competent in anyway.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
openquery 1y ago
Close to the end of the paper they casually drop that they solved all the millennium problems including the Riemann Hypothesis and have Lean proofs for all of them. I don't know enough physics or mathematics to be able to tell whether any of this holds or if it's o3 generated engagement bait. On further inspection the author seems to have a bored ape as their X profile pic so I'm going with engagement bait. Pretty high quality bait though.

11 points by dvcoolster 1y ago

I'm not an expert in any of this, but it just sounds crackpot to me. Like someone trying to make a unified theory of the universe as being a self building steam engine in 1885 or something.

dvcoolster 1y ago

Full PDF: https://rbtzero.github.io/rbt/RBT_v1.0_release.pdf https://rbtzero.github.io/rbt/RBT_v1.0_release.pdf Public Repository: https://github.com/rbtzero/rbt https://github.com/rbtzero/rbt

hamburga 1y ago

Seems like a fellow traveler with the Wolfram Model of physics. But they’re also making falsifiable predictions. According to Gemini 2.5 Pro: “Based on the content of the provided PDF, "RBT_v1.0_release.pdf," the research presented is not connected to the Wolfram Model. Regarding experimental results and falsifiable predictions, the document explicitly states that the theory of "Recursive Becoming" is falsifiable. It further outlines six concrete, parameter-free predictions that are intended to be testable before the year 2030: * Test 1: Ring-aperture X-ray line (XRISM) * Test 2: Axial-lepton phase shift (MAGIS-100) * Test 3: EDM sign (CASPEr) * Test 4: Missing-energy bump (Super-Charm) * Test 5: Curvature waveguide loss * Test 6: Immersive VR power budget” We just need to have some art and theology in place by 2030 to make human sense of this :)

dvcoolster 1y ago
It's actually right away, XRISM can check it. We are writing to them for detecting the neutral knot

voxl 1y ago

This heavily trips the crackpot index: 1. Zero understanding about the philosophy of mathematics 2. Asking the public and AI models for peer review instead of the scientific community via publication at a physics conference 3. Association with blockchain NTFs a known "technology" whose only application is grifting 4. The very first comment is yet another appeal to an LLM to attempt to understand the gibberish The world is doomed, I've not hated people more than I do now. If you use LLMs for anything above a stochastic autocomplete I don't consider you a professional or competent in anyway.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

openquery 1y ago

Close to the end of the paper they casually drop that they solved all the millennium problems including the Riemann Hypothesis and have Lean proofs for all of them. I don't know enough physics or mathematics to be able to tell whether any of this holds or if it's o3 generated engagement bait. On further inspection the author seems to have a bored ape as their X profile pic so I'm going with engagement bait. Pretty high quality bait though.