News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why Understanding Space Is So Hard (2016) by TheOtherHobbes on Sunday January 21, 2018 @10:47AM (#16198455)
Not sure why you're being downvoted.

What you're describing isn't too far from Causal Dynamical Triangulation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation

Re:Why Understanding Space Is So Hard (2016) by js8 on Sunday January 21, 2018 @12:42PM (#16199019)
> Not sure why you're being downvoted.

Thanks, I was also confused, but according to some weird social customs enforced on HN, I cannot sincerely ask that question. On the other hand, I am not sure about the upvotes either.

I actually didn't mean to develop some new physics theory, I just wanted to play a mathematical game (like Game of Life, for example), which would alter its own space/geometry. And this seemed as a good place to mention it, and get some feedback if somebody was aware of something similar. Because I found it quite nontrivial (to make it work "decently", in a vague sense), despite my lack of ambitions to explain physics.

CDT looks interesting, but it's not quite what I had in mind.

Re:Why Understanding Space Is So Hard (2016) by pharrington on Sunday January 21, 2018 @11:46AM (#16198687)
The downvotes may be from people wanting to help the uninformed/hobbyists avoid wasting time trying to do something that's unrealistic - http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/9/e1701758.

(I upvoted because the unrigorous idea of some sort of "foam automata" is cool, even if a formal, universal version of it is impossible.)