Dhillon1724X

Sir, if you are referring to me, I would like to clarify that if version 1 of my theory was about 40% developed, then version 2 is currently around 80–90% and it will not stop at 100% as i will go deeper and deeper. I have explored the subject deeply enough that my model unifies General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics and reproduces precise classical results, such as Newton’s equations. I am also working on an even deeper extension that aligns with String Theory, but I prefer to fully test all possibilities before making any announcements. As i said now i have to go to school,now i have limited time,However, I find that the school curriculum limits me, as the science taught is very basic compared to what I am working on and due to assignments and homework i have to pause my work. The GraviGenesis model does not invoke gravity to explain itself. Rather, it proposes that under Planck-scale photon energy density, a collapse occurs not due to gravity, but due to quantum-scale confinement and energetic saturation. This leads to the emergence of spin-2 gravitons — which then cause gravitational interaction and curvature of spacetime. Gravity is not an assumption — it is an emergent result. I can only explain this much here. This paper was built by a student who always tried to skip homework — but couldn’t skip the urge to understand the universe.

You're completely right that gravitons can't be assumed without a proper field-theoretic foundation — in QED and QCD, particles like photons and gluons arise only after the field is defined and quantized. In my updated framework (GraviGenesis V2), I’ve worked to meet that standard. I don’t assume gravitons — I derive them from a quantized process that begins with photon collapse at Planck-scales. This leads to localized spin-2 excitations, which I define as gravitons. The model includes: A Planck-threshold condition for graviton formation A quantized gravitational energy field described through energy density, redshift, and curvature A Lagrangian formulation for a massless spin-2 field And a reinterpretation of the Einstein field source using a sum over localized graviton energy densities, instead of a smooth classical tensor This is just a glimpse of the larger framework — there will be more additions, and likely revisions too. As joigus once said, "The most useful tool for a theoretical physicist is actually the wastepaper basket." I fully agree — and I’m ready to refine whatever doesn’t hold up.

You're absolutely right — when energy density exceeds the Planck scale, general relativity predicts gravitational collapse and the formation of an event horizon. My approach fully agrees with that outcome. However, my model focuses on the pre-collapse regime — a phase where photons dominate and gravity hasn't yet emerged as a classical field. In this state, I propose that extremely energetic photons, when confined to Planck-scale volumes, undergo a quantum transition into spin-2 bosons (gravitons). This is based on spin-coupling rules and supported by high-energy QED effects and string-theoretic analogies. The key idea is that gravitons are not assumed, but generated under specific physical conditions. They represent the first quantized units of curvature, and their formation marks the beginning of gravity in this framework. In the updated version (V2), I’ve worked more deeply on black hole formation and the role of graviton.I have also tried to predict nature of graviton Note: Now my school has re-opened so my replies will be slower and my work will be delayed too. Update on GraviGenesis V2: Approaching Deeper Territory Just a quick note — the current direction of GraviGenesis V2 is taking a deeper turn. After careful thought and continued analysis, the model is now beginning to align with some of the more advanced ideas in modern theoretical physics, including frameworks from quantum theory and string theory. Certain assumptions have been restructured, and the internal consistency of the model has significantly improved. I won’t reveal details yet — but the next phase will shift the conversation entirely. More to come.

I am working on it.As much as i have completed work it combines them in real.My first theory the V1 is foundation with alot of mistakes to explain and gaps,but V2 is more advanced and complete then before.I am doing this with limited time and no formal training as i am around 15yr old.

Sir you are right,but as i mentioned there were some explaination mistakes in V1.Its explained properly in V2.I will welcome any new critique. Thanks for giving your precious time.

To be honest sometimes I get wilder ideas that Sir I am adding maths and have added atleast basics.I know that it will be just a fantasy without maths.

Really appreciate your thoughts — and I agree, the way GG, ℏℏ, and cc come together at the Planck scale does seem to point to something deeper we still don’t fully understand. The scales they define are so extreme, it feels like nature is telling us there’s a limit to how small, energetic, or short-lived things can get. And yes, having GG in the formula does bring gravity into the picture, no doubt. But in my model, GG is part of setting the threshold — not assuming that gravity is already active. The idea is that once energy density crosses that boundary, then gravity (via gravitons) begins to emerge. I also found your point about minimal information really interesting. Maybe that’s part of what links energy, geometry, and quantum gravity together. I don’t have a full answer either, but I think it’s the kind of question worth looking into more deeply. Thanks again for engaging — I really respect your view.

I understand that many of the critiques may be based on my earlier foundational version, which did have several gaps in explanation — it was still in development at that stage. But I’ve since worked hard to fix those issues. In the current version (GraviGenesis V2), the core assumptions have been clarified, logical structure strengthened, and key points like photon-photon interactions, spin-2 graviton formation, and Planck threshold mechanisms are now properly defined. I’ve also added observable evidence references (like light-by-light scattering) and fully aligned the model with Newtonian and relativistic predictions. I’m currently expanding the theory into black hole formation — including a graviton-based mechanism that naturally explains Hawking radiation through graviton field dissipation. Happy to share the updated version and always open to constructive critique as the theory evolves further. Good question — and you're right to press on the source of energy. In this model, the energy doesn't come from a pre-existing photon field, but from the initial conditions of the Big Bang itself. The universe began in an extremely hot, dense state, and that energy was initially carried by photons. What the model proposes is that, during the earliest instants after the Big Bang, the photon energy density crossed the Planck threshold. This triggered a quantum transition, where photon-photon interactions at those extreme scales led to the formation of gravitons — which then began to shape spacetime. So the energy is not gravitational to begin with. It’s just raw radiation energy from the Big Bang, and gravity emergesfrom how that energy evolves at the quantum level.

You're absolutely right — the Planck threshold is defined using fundamental constants including G, along with h and c. That’s fully acknowledged in the model. But just to clarify: while G is part of the definition, the theory does not assume gravitational effects to cause graviton formation. It uses energy density at the Planck scale as the trigger, not pre-existing gravity or curvature. Thanks again for the correction — I genuinely appreciate the engagement and respect your words.

Thanks for the feedback. Just to clarify — the issue you raised has already been addressed in GraviGenesis V2. The model doesn't assume gravity to explain gravity. It proposes that when two high-energy photons interact and their combined energy exceeds the Planck threshold within a small volume, they can form a spin-2 graviton. This is explicitly stated and based on known quantum spin coupling rules (1⊗1 = 0⊕1⊕2). So the graviton emerges from photon interactions — not from gravity itself. (I’ve used some tools to write this am reply as was unable to write 1⊗1 = 0⊕1⊕2 manually)

I understand Sir. I understand Sir. that issue was present in the early version but has been fully addressed in Version 2. The updated model includes proper thresholds to ensure ordinary photons cannot collapse, and all relevant conditions are now quantified. Appreciate the critique — it helped improve the work.

The Reflection of Someone The Beautiful Lie The Best Teacher The Story of Someone I will try to add more with time.

I understand sir. But if i get motive to learn then i will continue with this thing until it either fails or become perfect. The world needs more losers to win. As for the line “I don’t have to think about the details” — To be honest, that made you sound amateur and arrogant in my view. Update! I have removed some extra claims and sections for now as i will research more before adding them. PoRes might be removed from Version 2.I will ready complete progress update and post in while. GraviGenesis – Progress Update Since my initial post, I’ve made several meaningful refinements to the GraviGenesis model. The framework now focuses more precisely on how high energy conditions at fundamental scales could give rise to gravitational behavior, using a structured field approach. I’ve developed a custom Lagrangian for a spin-2 gravitational field that avoids ghost instabilities and respects gauge symmetry. The model has also been reshaped to recover Newtonian gravity through numerical tests, increasing its consistency with known physics. One of the most important conceptual additions is the idea of curvature decay — a natural weakening of spacetime curvature over time due to redshifted field energy. Overall,the theory has moved away from symbolic intuition and is now taking a more mathematical and falsifiable form, open to review and criticism. Small Update 349 views and growing — appreciate everyone who’s read or engaged so far. I’ll continue improving the structure and testing the model as far as it holds. Still a work in progress, but the goal remains the same: to either shape something solid or watch it collapse for the right reasons.

Do you think that I got this idea from AI? If yes, then you are wrong, sir.I had the question: what if light is the source of everything — and by light, I mean the photon. Science grew this much because of foolish ideas and so-called nonsense,then why don’t we let our brains be free and explore this universe? If I’m wrong, then I’m wrong. I will throw it in the bin if needed,I don’t care about that. I am here to explore, create, and not to obey a foolish system. If you take a look at history, then in this century there are no revolutionary theories,but we have more advanced tools and access to any information we want. Back then, they wrote freely, with the pure intention to know the universe,not just to protect careers or chase recognition. I will do as much as I can.

If you know to use a needle, you can unlock the strongest locks with it 🔒

Sir thats the point which distinguish AI generated work from AI assisted.I use it as tool to gather knowledge,do some advance maths which i tell it to. It cant do a thing on its own.I have learnt enough basics to check if its rubbish or not.I have some methods too.I check everything number of times.If i dont know then i research and learn,and i have senior members like you from whom i can ask for help.The Lagrangian it derived was represenation of my words and symbols.I learnt basics today as much as i can from internet in limited time(I have school assignments to complete) and gave basic structure,it is not advanced but atleast good for my age. If i make a mistake then i will happily admit it as it will be mine mistake but i will improve it. At the end i am a kid who refuses to stay in cage Thanks for giving your precious time.

Hlo Everyone, Update! One bad or it might be good as i derived Lagrangian but with help of AI. At the end i had to use AI as a tool again.But it can be proof that AI can be used as science tool

Good news! Now i dont need to say AI assisted anymore as i made my graviton origination Lagrangian and formating v2 on my own.I didnt need to say it in V1 too but i did.

Sorry for hyperlinks it was a mistake. here's complete message- Hlo everyone, I am focusing on solving all the problems and trying to find flaws. I will be very thankful to anyone who write critiques and write words of appreciation. It will also help me to prove myself to school so I can focus on my work with support from teachers too. If any professor or a phd,degree holder can write just a letter stating that its not a child's scribble but some work with potential. As i said earlier i have found out the fixation which are needed to make it more solid and i have also have found solution or we can say i have clarified the problems related with QED,Mass and known physics.Now V2 fully aligns with current physics and may extend it.But i need time to format paper and publish which only can be achieved by showing my potential to school and parents too.Its hard to explain directly to school teachers and parents. i am tagging u all to request for help @studiot @joigus @MigL as u guys are the one i know. About the flaws which were pointed out by respective seniors,I found out that it’s because of lack of Ability to explain and due to shortage of time.I admit that I made mistake and it’s mine mistake.Its my first research paper so I would try to improve in next ones. At the end, Thankyou everyone for supporting(even if a bit) this foolish kid i have pointed a mistake or i can say its extra.Its structure formation and blackhole formation.I will like everyone to overlook it for now as i forgot to mark it hypothetical.

You did Hardwork. maybe my theory which is in development phase can tell u something more gravity.V1 of theory is already published but it doesnt deeply explain things and have gaps in explaining,which will be fixed in V2.I would appreciate if you take a look.I would clarify any problem if you have or any doubt.i have solved all current problems pointed by seniors.

Sir i am very-very sorry.I didnt know that they were hyperlinks.Please forgive me.I tried to remove it but i was unable to do that,maybe it was because of my autocorrect on phone.I usually use Laptop and Chromebook so it doesnt happen on it.I willl try to learn to how to fix it. i know about w3shools but problem is that now i dont have time.I need something to prove seriousness of my GraviGenesis Theory,its v1 with some flaws which are pointed by seniors but i solved them in v2 and i am working on it.If i get good response and something formal from a proffesor to show to my Teacher i might get time to complete my work.I was also developing a symbological system,its currently symbolic philosophy.I am focusing on these topics currently.I will continue things related to computer later. Can help me to prove my seriousness related to work and can state that my work is not just a child´s scribble as it will help me to prove myself to even teachers who are bound to schools curriculum but they cant ignore a letter from a profesor or hyperlink removed by moderator can u reffer me or introduce to a physicist.

Yes,you are right hyperlink removed by moderator hyperlink removed by moderator doesn’t give good code.I have been into basic web development and made a website.I also tried to learn programming and game development too but I had to drop everything in just beginning phase due to school and lack of hyperlink removed by moderator I barely remember anything. Thats why I also requested everyone to drop word of appreciation so I can prove myself to teacher and parents.I accepted every critique and solved every flaw by now. I will also take critiques as word of appreciation and recognition of my work

Hlo everyone, I am focusing on solving all the problems and trying to find flaws. I will be very thankful to anyone who write critiques and write words of appreciation. It will also help me to prove myself to school so I can focus on my work too,as it’s hard to explain to parents,teachers and others about theories as they will say it’s just a kid messing around,but these words of appreciation will work as magic to prove that I am seriously working on something. I need help from community. About the flaws which were pointed out by respective seniors,I found out that it’s because of lack of Ablity to explain and due to shortage of time.I admit that I made mistake and it’s mine mistake.Its my first research paper so I would try to improve in next ones. At the end, Thankyou everyone for supporting(even if a bit) this foolish kid

So Sir you are saying that ChatGPT is good tool? In my view it is good tool if used by guiding it and not following hyperlink removed by moderator hyperlink removed by moderator can help us to overcome our weaknesses and can calculate complex things which need paid tools(sometimes). It’s all upon the person using it.This tool can be used for many advanced things or maybe not but it can be used to build advanced things for sure,but some are limited to know how to use it to build advanced things and people often follow it without a question,which can be counted as AI generated work.

Hi everyone — just an update on the graviton theory I shared earlier. I’ve spent the last day carefully going through all the critiques, especially the ones about gauge symmetry, spin formation, and redshift behavior. I realized most of the earlier issues weren’t in the idea itself, but in how I explained or scaled certain things. ✅ I’ve now corrected the energy evolution (redshift) ✅ Added proper spin-2 formation via photon-photon interaction ✅ Ensured it respects diffeomorphism symmetry (gauge invariance) ✅ Confirmed the present-day graviton energy fits observational limits ✅ Clarified the difference between rest mass and energy-equivalent mass So the core idea — that gravitons may emerge from high-energy photon collapse — is now more solid and compatible with QFT and GR foundations. I welcome any fresh critiques. I’m a 10th-grade student, and I’ve only studied basic physics from NCERT so far — Newton’s laws, gravitation, sound, and motion. I haven’t reached the chapters on light or electricity yet. In math, I’ve done algebra, geometry, and some trigonometry — but honestly, I struggle with math in school and I haven’t learned calculus or advanced symbolic math at all. I didn’t read research papers or take any courses. I just picked up bits of science from social media posts, YouTube clips, science memes, and random things people said — and I got really curious. That led me to start thinking on my own and slowly build this theory. I know it has flaws — especially in the mass calculation, missing gauge theory, and weak math context — but I didn’t write it to prove I’m a genius. I wrote it because I love trying to understand the universe. And I’m here to improve it by learning from better minds.