Wigners_friend@lemm.ee 1 week ago
The equations emerge from thin air without justification. Free parameters abound so anything can be fitted. The primitive variables seem to imply non-fundamental physics. How does a “recursive” field have pressure or tension? These imply it’s made of something? Moreover, your equation’s units make no sense. Looking at your simulations, you are tuning the free parameters by hand to get vague agreement with data. This is entirely unserious.
Asswardbackaddict@lemmy.world 1 week ago
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.