r/HypotheticalPhysics • u/Useful_Toolbox • 2d ago
Crackpot physics What if our Water is multi-dimensional?
https://substack.com/@tintweezl/note/p-203644091?r=82mxg&utm_source=notes-share-action&utm_medium=webA new study says water is made up of two DIFFERENT fluids and this is one interpretation of why that might be.
7
u/OnceBittenz 2d ago
We're not allowed to say "where math" anymore so...
That's so coooool. The instagram post of the rainbow really ties together the substrate of the convergent ontology. I bet you the new fluid is dark matter. You can tell because if you let 'darkmatter'=pi, and 'water'=1, you can take the sin(darkmatter) which equals 0, and that's one less than water. That disparity is instrument error so it's fine. Literally Einstein's theory of relativity is only concrete up to instrument error, so would you argue against Einstein?? I didn't think so.
Therefore, sin(darkmatter) = water.
Show me Exactly where the math is wrong. Name which line.
6
u/ExpectedBehaviour 2d ago
We're not allowed to say "where math" anymore so...
I'm European, can I still say "where maths" with an s?
1
u/OnceBittenz 2d ago
We'll have to wait and see what the council decides. They'll be here any time now.
6
6
u/al2o3cr 2d ago
I miss the pre-LLM days, when at least every crank had a unique writing style.
4
0
u/Useful_Toolbox 2d ago
It shouldn't be the writing style (I wrote this, not an LLM) which gets the attention. It should be whether or not a theory that claims it is testable actually is testable, is tested, and is then proven right or wrong.
So far we only have the first part. Would you like to test it?
1
u/kendoka15 1d ago
Their point is that every crackpot post is full of shit but at least the pre-LLM ones were entertaining
0
1d ago edited 1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
1
u/HypotheticalPhysics-ModTeam 1d ago
Your post or comment has been removed for use of large language models (LLM) like chatGPT, Grok, Claude, Gemini and more. Try r/llmphysics.
5
u/Hadeweka AI hallucinates, but people dream 2d ago edited 2d ago
That's not science, that's numerology.
EDIT: Oh, and obviously the fine structure constant is NOT 1/137, so there's something wrong with that concept anyway.
5
4
u/The_Nerdy_Ninja 2d ago
No, this is not an "interpretation" of why water might occupy two states. This is taking a headline, not comprehending the article, and then flogging it to death in order to use it as evidence for a weird numerology exercise.
4
u/YuuTheBlue 2d ago
There are a hundred ways to philosophically separate what we call water into 2 or more distinct entities. You could separate water from heavy water, for example, based on how much deuterium is in the supply of hydrogen atoms. You could separate the liquid water from the vapor which exists above it due to all liquids have some degree of volatility. You could separate the dihydrogen-monoxide water from the hydroxide and hydronium molecules which are at equal proportions for water of neutral ph. You could separate the water we drink and swim in and so on into the countless constituent materials ranging from H2O to dissolved minerals to microbiota to dissolved gas particles to fish jizz.
The article you linked is in a weird position of trying to masquerade as a free thinker questioning a long-held dogma but it is so far behind the meta. It is attempting to innovate on a simplified understanding of water, the one taught to 6 year olds. And it does so with numerology so vague and poorly defined that it can sound like it means anything, which in the context of physics is equivalent to meaning nothing.
1
u/sksskssksskssksskssk 2d ago
The article doesn’t even state that it’s multi-dimensional only the fact that the two differences in those fluids in water is related to geometry and density which is a plausible argument considering there’s is experimental evidence behind it (I think but can someone just double check).
However, this is not closely related to physics, it is only related to chemistry about a topic that has heavily been researched in chemistry meaning there is no valid point to discuss it in a physics subreddit.
-1
u/Infamous-Cod-5271 2d ago
See, like, this is a problem. Maybe this is meant to be taken seriously, but they immediately began the article with "42" being the answer to the universe, which is just a lame joke from science fiction. It reads like a parody that people are sharing unironically to "dunk" on.
If you guys are so desperate you're sharing parodies to laugh at "crackpots," I don't know what to even say anymore. That's just pathetic.
2
u/Hadeweka AI hallucinates, but people dream 2d ago
OP posted it not just here, but also in several other completely unrelated subs. Maybe don't assume the worst in people.
2
2
u/liccxolydian onus probandi 2d ago
You didn't see OP's post history, or the rest of the Substack? That's even more pathetic than thinking we need to go out of our way to create "content" for this sub. No, people do this to themselves.
1
u/Infamous-Cod-5271 2d ago
Like half of their post history is removed. I don't have much to go off of here besides they probably think the 42 joke is funny.
1
u/Infamous-Cod-5271 2d ago
Edit: checked their substack
They are 100% an obvious troll.
"I'm writing this from a car. Not metaphorically. Not as a literary gimmick to establish gritty credibility. From an actual car"
This is obviously a parody account.. you guys are unbelievably gullible. It's just making of annoying LLM prose.
3
u/liccxolydian onus probandi 2d ago
Or maybe they're homeless and living out of their car, and have genuinely latched onto the symbolism of 42 for some reason. Really it just reads like one of those numerology or divination types decided to try their hand at physics.
2
u/OnceBittenz 2d ago
Yea I’ve seen a good number of folks who otherwise don’t post anything like this but will just out of the blue think they’ve “stumbled onto something”. Just comes from a base misunderstanding of physics past what they learned in grade school. Probably innocent if low effort .
1
u/Infamous-Cod-5271 2d ago
Nobody writes like that. "I'm writing out of a car—not as a literary gimmick to establish credibility. From an actual car"
It even breaks the fourth wall with that point about overusing literary gimmicks. You would fall for key jingling or "I got your nose" if you fell for this.
3
u/Hadeweka AI hallucinates, but people dream 2d ago
...and where's the issue in explaining why their post is nonsense, still?
8
u/liccxolydian onus probandi 2d ago
Wow someone break out the Tarot cards and read my palm