Edit: The paper is total nonsense. Sorry for wasting people’s time.

https://youtu.be/Yk_NjIPaZk4?si=dasxM2Py-s654djW

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
30 points
*

It’s utter bullshit from the very start. First, it isn’t true that the Ricci curvature can be written as they do in eqn (1). Second, in eqn (2) the Einstein tensor (middle term) cannot be replaced by the Ricci tensor (right-hand term), unless the Ricci scalar ® is zero, which only happens when there’s no energy. They nonchalantly do that replacement without even a hint of explanation.

Elsevier and ScienceDirect should feel ashamed. They can go f**k themselves.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

I do agree the whole paper is bull. Equations (1) and (2) are strictly speaking wrong, but you’d see these kinds of expressions if you are talking informally about these things. (1) should be a Riemann tensor, so its mostly wrong. For (2) it is a bit more general than R=0, since you could have Einsteinian manifolds and can make that redefinition. But yeah, without explaining anything, it’s just nonsense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sabine Hossenfelder now has a video about this paper:

https://youtu.be/Yk_NjIPaZk4?si=dasxM2Py-s654djW

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

On these things I think she could be right, but most of her physics stuff I do not agree with.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Science

!science@lemmy.ml

Create post

Subscribe to see new publications and popular science coverage of current research on your homepage


Community stats

  • 702

    Monthly active users

  • 1K

    Posts

  • 3.2K

    Comments

Community moderators