I Know This Sounds Like Crackpot Physics – Please Read It Anyway
Posted21 days agoActive20 days ago
pajuhaan.medium.comResearchstory
skepticalmixed
Debate
80/100
PhysicsRelativity
Key topics
Physics
Relativity
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
N/A
Peak period
3
0-2h
Avg / period
1.7
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 13, 2025 at 8:02 AM EST
21 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 13, 2025 at 8:02 AM EST
0s after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
3 comments in 0-2h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 14, 2025 at 9:24 AM EST
20 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46254242Type: storyLast synced: 12/13/2025, 1:05:15 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
HN Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
"please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize."
What I’m doing here is challenging a different assumption in the opposite direction—and yes, I know it immediately sounds like crackpot physics or numerology. That reaction is understandable after a century of abstract frameworks like many-worlds or extra dimensions.
But if you have a physics background, are a physics student, or seriously care about foundations, I think you owe it to yourself to at least read it. Assume it’s wrong—that’s fine. If you’re certain it’s wrong after reading, great. But if it’s right, even partially, it changes how you think about quantum mechanics, relativity, and what “fundamental” really means. Openly challenging foundations is a choice, and I’m making it deliberately.