I’m an independent researcher (and a medical doctor by training) who has developed a new approach to unifying quantum mechanics and general relativity through a fundamental correlation function C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y). This function describes how points in spacetime are correlated, and from it, geometry, matter, and quantum fields emerge as collective phenomena.Key Ideas:Emergent Spacetime: The metric tensor gμν(x)g_{\mu\nu}(x)gμν(x) is derived from C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y) via an integral relation, meaning geometry is not fundamental but emergent.Quantum Fields and Particles: Fluctuations δC(x,y)\delta C(x, y)δC(x,y) around a background correspond to quantum fields (scalars, fermions, gauge bosons), with their properties (mass, spin, charge) determined by the symmetries of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y).Unified Dynamics: A single equation governs the evolution of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y), which reduces to Einstein’s equations in the classical limit and reproduces quantum field theory near the diagonal x=yx = yx=y.Black Holes and Information: Extreme configurations of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y) describe black holes, and the theory naturally preserves information, potentially resolving the black hole information paradox.Why This Matters:No Free Parameters: Physical constants (masses, charges) may emerge as eigenvalues of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y), offering a path to a parameter-free theory.Explanatory Power: The theory provides a physical explanation for quantum non-locality and entanglement as inherent properties of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y).New Predictions: The framework suggests new dynamics at large separations ∣x−y∣≫0|x-y| \gg 0∣x−y∣≫0, which could explain dark matter or quantum gravity effects.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17384220
>>16819996>Why This Mattersanother retarded boomer thinking his schizophrenic conversations with ChatGPT count as muh research
>>16819996>Key Insight>Followed by bullet pointsHoly fuck, another ChatGPT faggot.
>>16820001Translation problem
>>16819996>Physical constants (masses, charges) may emerge as eigenvalues of C(x,y)C(x, y)C(x,y), offering a path to a parameter-free theory.Incredible. Can you produce one (1) prediction from your "theory", maybe the electron mass. Or perhaps the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon, could you tell me if SUSY is actually needed or can your theory can keep the Higgs light without fine tuning.
>>16820016This requires a lot of computing power and the work of entire research centers, so I want to check how valid the theory is in its current state.
>>16820019Yeah I thought you'd say something like that. Your idea is poorly thought out, to the point of not even being coherent. You can't do any of that because your basic idea doesn't make sense. For example, C(x,y) the central part of your "theory", isn't defined anywhere.That short output of a ChatGPT conversation is total garbage, fuck off and don't come back you faggot.
For the smart-alecks out there, I'll explain right away that I used the GPT chat for both the translation and the calculations, simply because I couldn't have explained it all correctly myself, as I don't have the appropriate education.But I double-checked everything, and in fact, this theory fits very smoothly with existing theories, so go ahead and think about it.
>>16820023>this theory fits very smoothly with existing theories, so go ahead and think about it.Can you derive the scattering amplitude for Rutherford scattering from your theory? Can you reproduce something from QFT, QM, or GR from your theory?>inb4 "no"
>>16820027yes, check
>>16820039No derivations in the paper. Fuck off retard.
how is the black hole information paradox resolved in your theory? extreme configurations of what? are you implying hairy black holes?
>>16820476Information is stored in non-local correlations.In my theory, the black hole information paradox is resolved naturally: information is never lost, because fundamental reality is not local objects in spacetime, but a global network of correlations that evolves unitarily and preserves all information.Check it out
>>16820528https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17388900Further thoughts and conclusions
Listen, guys.I understand that this all sounds like schizophrenia.But the theory magically fits and complements existing theories.Furthermore, the theory allows for consistent quantization.It also corresponds to causality in non-local theories (according to Efremov and Smirnov).I'm asking you to simply check whether everything is really so good.
>>16819996The worst thing to come out of widespread access to AI has been the ridiculous number of schizos being convinced that their retarded ramblings are deep and secret knowledge. Every Mandlbaur-tier faggot out there is convinced they're fucking Einstein or Feynman now, just because ChatGPT sycophantically sucks their dick every time they prompt it.>Hye Copilot, what if liek, realty is just an alien silmulshun?>Wow! That's a really insightful idea! You're so smart! Have you considered upgrading to a Premium account?
>>16820706The theory C(x,y) in its current form MEETS Popper's criteria for a scientific theory.
Think what you want, I won't follow the thread.
>>16820746>The theory C(x,y)Lmao, you don't even define C(x,y). How the fuck can I recover a metric with the integral of a function that has no definition?
>>16819996>schizobabble>massive overconfidence in own intelligence and competence >medical doctorchecks out
>medical doctor
>>16819996I like the "eight vertices of a cube" version of your image better.Since classical mechanics -- if I remember correctly -- is included in that version.And corresponds to the origin of a unit cube.
