2 min readJust now
–
Press enter or click to view image in full size
History is blunt. Boltzmann’s atoms were mocked before they became obvious. Cantor’s infinities were dismissed, then reshaped modern math. Wegener’s drifting continents were “impossible,” until they were the map. So let’s ask the uncomfortable questions. What if the electron’s mass isn’t a sacred constant at all, but an emergent fixed point — something you can reach from first principles and stability, not decree? What if the fine-structure constant, the riddle that haunted Dirac and Feynman, is actually calculable? And what if quantum gravity — and even the measurement problem — admit a cleaner, testable story when you start from a minimal geometric lock?
That’s the wager behind Relator theory: [one simple geom…
2 min readJust now
–
Press enter or click to view image in full size
History is blunt. Boltzmann’s atoms were mocked before they became obvious. Cantor’s infinities were dismissed, then reshaped modern math. Wegener’s drifting continents were “impossible,” until they were the map. So let’s ask the uncomfortable questions. What if the electron’s mass isn’t a sacred constant at all, but an emergent fixed point — something you can reach from first principles and stability, not decree? What if the fine-structure constant, the riddle that haunted Dirac and Feynman, is actually calculable? And what if quantum gravity — and even the measurement problem — admit a cleaner, testable story when you start from a minimal geometric lock?
That’s the wager behind Relator theory: one simple geometric constraint linking an internal rhythm to ordinary space, then let the math run. In this view, three “untouchables” turn into results; α emerges without feeding in experimental α, the electron’s mass falls out of the same structure, and gravity gains a coherent quantum narrative. If these claims make you bristle, good — scrutiny is the point. Could the electron’s g-factor be derived without summoning the usual diagram zoo? Could we audit each step, reproduce the numbers, and see where the argument bends or holds? Big claims deserve bright lights; replication is the light.
Now the human part. Twenty-plus years on, I learned that the biggest barrier isn’t the algebra — it’s the gate. Independent researchers without a big-name email often meet closed doors, vanishing posts, and quick labels. I’m not claiming perfection; no theory lands flawless on day one — Einstein, Planck, and Maxwell had rough edges, too. The question is the backbone: minimal assumptions, a straight path, and predictions you can check. Even if 50% stands, that’s a door opening, not a threat. Compared with fashionable frameworks that rarely compute concrete constants, a reproducible route to emergent α and electron mass is at least worth a sober look. Don’t ignore it — audit it. If it fails, great, we learn. If it stands, even partly, history will do what it always does: flip.