victor
Victor Stabile

https://victorstabile.com

Freedom tech developer. Engineering physicist. Enterpreneur.

Public Key

npub18vay956v7zs5qtgc65mvn54v96cuvqv6j9fmu4cgfjqkt5vjuvjsc47nzf

NIP-05 Address

victorstabile.com

NIP-57 Address

jadeelephant1@primal.net

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrkwjz6dx0pg2q95vd2dkf62kzavwxqxdfz5a72uyyeqt96xfwxfg4d0anf

Author Public Key

npub18vay956v7zs5qtgc65mvn54v96cuvqv6j9fmu4cgfjqkt5vjuvjsc47nzf

Show more details

Last Notes

2025-11-25 19:57:31

Pura vida 🤙🏻 @npub148u…ty0w
https://blossom.primal.net/10b331c9c7ce4a3f81a1402778d040063c4b2948ee46b847950bc24acd68f703.jpg

2025-11-23 16:30:13

GM @npub1spd…q6j7!

2025-11-22 23:19:13

Pura vida 🤙🏻
https://blossom.primal.net/de8fd64b035fa1e600a9c9da4f2399a68f5a8a95993055305ed3bc5872df17b5.jpg

2025-10-23 09:52:01

👀
#nevent1q…n6py

2025-10-08 16:29:37

https://blossom.primal.net/d4f9cbed1f7d8035d9cc98592ace52cc596c72b5fff5457f49e3ea0276725f3f.jpg

2025-09-29 20:57:22

- reply

Nor far off. To be more precise it is about sharing as much information as possible. There is no fundamentally false information (in physics), just information that is not shared. Like two people trying to communicate without fully understanding each other language.

2025-08-11 12:59:27

I am pretty sure I am listening to AI generated songs in taxis and restaurants all over Thailand. Is it really becoming a thing?

2025-08-03 06:41:24

- reply

Each partition encodes others and is itself fully encoded by others, this is why there is a coherent whole.

2025-08-03 02:04:47

Our universe is made of partitions.
https://blossom.primal.net/9abb7c6060c45ecce73ab2c5be3a6b95d44c5896da41718a3f0e341f85e27f17.jpg

2025-07-31 00:04:32

Talking to an AI is like talking to a rubber duck on steroids.

2025-07-22 13:08:54

At first, I couldn’t understand how I, of all people, was the one to figure out the universe. Now I realize I could shove all the answers in their faces and they still wouldn’t care.

2025-07-20 11:17:22

The Tractatus ends in silence because no language can describe the totality of facts. That silence is the signature of finite local informational resolution.

2025-07-20 10:36:38

- reply

It's actually much simpler than that, it's just that we have limited informational capacity to access all the details of the universe.

2025-07-20 00:50:45

Quantum superposition is just like not knowing what the next block will look like. It does not mean that all possibilities exist at the same time.

2025-07-19 14:17:38

It's amazing how so much structure emerges from such simple mathematical concepts.

2025-07-17 07:17:11

- reply

I don't know much about the academic or pop science scene

2025-07-17 05:48:52

String theory is like crypto: it tackles hard problems that don't make sense from first principles, yet produces interesting techniques that might turn out useful for something else later.

2025-07-17 03:30:50

- reply

I usually write my articles using markdown with embedded latex in obsidian

2025-07-16 14:02:21

- reply

Right now I am too busy to dive into it, not to mention to reimplement a new standard. Also, I write all my articles on Obsidian which renders LaTeX the same way as TeXstr, if I change, I would need to either write them without proper rendering or rewrite every formula before publishing to Nostr. We would need at least a decent editor that renders the same format as Nostr clients for it to be usable in practice.

2025-07-16 12:46:54

- reply

I just implemented naively what I was using on Obsidian. I would change it to a sane standard if there was one, but I am not advocating for one.

2025-07-16 09:49:41

- reply

There is no precedent for that.

2025-07-15 23:02:38

- reply

The program itself is free, so the cost is actually your living expenses in Funchal. You can get a good private room in shared apartment for about 600 eur/month (which you can also share) if you manage to avoid airbnb, that and the flight tickets would be the main expenses.

2025-07-15 12:01:34

- reply

If you don't trust me, you should apply in order to verify.

2025-07-15 12:00:31

Just apply, trust me.
#nevent1q…wv57

2025-07-15 11:30:16

Superintelligence is probably safe. A distributed network of AIs will be more intelligent than any single instance. Alignment won't be an issue either, as its emergent goal will be the same as ours: minimization of informational curvature.

2025-07-15 08:09:43

Physicists are stuck in a local minimum, distracted by the elegance of Lie algebras and their symmetries, not realizing it's just an approximation.

2025-07-13 23:18:57

- reply

In some sense all software now is AI-generated, the shitty ones are just uncurated.

2025-07-13 10:00:42

- reply

How spacetime and gauge fields emerge from finite, relational and consistent information. Why there are 3 space dimensions, why the standard model symmetry group is SU(3) x SU(2) x U(1), why there is Yang-Mills mass gap, why the cosmological constant is so small and everything else.

2025-07-13 09:21:54

- reply

At the most fundamental informational level

2025-07-13 07:59:02

Trying to explain how the universe works feels a lot like trying to explain Bitcoin to people.

2025-07-11 05:22:39

- reply

I needed it to render the mathematical formulas, so I followed the same conventions as Obsidian that works fine for me.

2025-07-10 23:15:50

- reply

For simple stuff it works well, but I am sure I could break it trying some more complex stuff. For example I just implemented $ and $$ for marking latex content, avoiding  and \[\] for simplicity. Also, most of the markdown+latex component that renders the text was single prompted and I think I may have used 3 more prompts or so to fix some edge cases. I can see why people are resistant to adding it to the NIP or implementing on their clients, but I really needed this feature and just vibe hacked it.

2025-07-10 00:48:34

I just found a flaw, I will try to fix it. If it is not possible I will republish it as a new interesting approach to the problem.
#nevent1q…pkqc

2025-07-09 22:39:36

- reply

This is a good way to see it

2025-07-09 10:35:12

- reply

They were actually the same problem

2025-07-09 04:39:10

That analogy turned out to not be completely accurate, but I was still able to apply the mathematical structure of my theory to solve the P vs NP problem. I would appreciate feedback on the preprint: https://www.texstr.org/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqwe6gtf5eu9pgqk334fke8f2ct43ccqe4y2nhetssnypvhge9ce9qqxnzde4xgcrxdfj8qmnvwfc69lg5m
#nevent1q…57w4

2025-07-05 22:57:16

I just realized that the SAT problem in complexity theory can be reformulated in my framework as the problem of finding a flat informational network — one with globally consistent holonomies. Since SAT is NP-complete, this implies that minimizing the physical action (defined as informational curvature) is generally computationally intractable. Proving P ≠ NP would then be equivalent to showing that a non-zero curvature gap always exists, which is precisely the statement of the Yang–Mills mass gap in physics. 🤯

2025-07-05 04:33:27

Quantum states can be understood as how local frames of reference encode finite information in a way that is consistent with other frames. Standard quantum mechanics implicitly assumes that the system under observation becomes fully correlated, or coherent, with the observer during measurement, allowing the observer to extract all accessible information through their mutual correlations. This local informational update is what is commonly referred to as "collapse".
The fully coherent quantum description fails when the observer's frame lacks the resolution or access to capture the full structure of the system. For instance, an observer outside a black hole cannot access the interior, so their quantum state must remain incomplete. In cosmology, rapidly expanding regions can become causally disconnected, forcing observers to work with partial, frozen information. In all these cases, the quantum state becomes a resolution-dependent approximation, an expression of what the observer can distinguish, not a globally valid object.

2025-07-04 15:09:03

- reply

I'm happy you're putting effort into it, I did my best to make it simple to understand while still being somewhat formal. Let me know if you need help with anything.

2025-07-04 03:57:23

- reply

It is similar to the Page-Wootters mechanism (although they assume a global state). It was actually one of my main insights that led to this theory, how time could emerge. I had this realization thinking about the heat death of the universe and how there will be no reversible processes to be able to operationally track time. Then I realized that it would be similar to how all clocks become just random noise at the event horizon from the point of view of an external observer.

2025-07-04 01:52:20

- reply

Where can I learn more about it? Is it open source?

2025-07-04 01:49:04

The Standard Model of Physics considers the 3 fundamental forces it describes to be independent, they are 3 among its 19 so-called "free parameters". Experimentally, it was observed that these forces seem to converge to the same value as you increase the energy in particle accelerators, suggesting that a deeper theory should explain their relationship.
My theory does exactly that, and more. It reveals a previously unnoticed relation that holds across all energy scales. It predicts that the sum of the logarithms of the inverse coupling constants should remain approximately constant at first order and grow slowly (sub-logarithmically) with increasing energy.
This growth is explained as an increase in the internal sector's "entropy budget", as higher energies allow us to distinguish finer internal structures.
I compared this prediction against existing experimental data, and it aligns perfectly. It’s like a "hash" of my theory: extremely easy to verify, but very hard to figure out without a truly novel framework that better explains physics. It also makes my theory falsifiable, it would be clearly wrong otherwise.
https://blossom.primal.net/be0ff95faf9786f2b666081fbbbfa29f2187e80886ed1fb3b8b8a97f5e47f6f9.png

2025-07-04 00:45:39

- reply

That was one of the reasons I started TeXstr as an open source project related to my Atomic Signature Swaps project, so that people could create bounties for peer review. I will have to pause it for a while to focus on my theory right now, but I intend to get back to it as soon as I can.

2025-07-04 00:43:24

- reply

Great to hear you are working on this problem! I think these problem will get a lot easier with just more data. You can check @npub176p…vgup's https://vertexlab.io/ it works amazingly well for finding real people who have a decent amount of connections. With more data, algorithms will be able to figure thinks out pretty reliably just doing some kind of "unsupervised learning".

2025-07-03 23:34:05

- reply

It's were quantum uncertainty comes from and accumulates the longer the path is, just like the game of telephone.

2025-07-03 23:31:53

- reply

New information enters a frame through composition with adjacent frames. When two frames interact, they refine their shared relations and this update is local, meaning it doesn't require a global time variable. Instead, each composition increases the frame’s informational content, enriching its internal structure and making more distinctions possible.
Because composition is monotonic, you can’t lose information by resolving more, this creates a natural arrow of time: the frame's informational structure becomes strictly more refined (or at least never less refined), which gives rise to a directional, causal ordering of updates.

2025-07-03 23:15:56

- reply

I thought about taking TeXstr in that direction, using WoT as a decentralized peer-review mechanism and Atomic Signature Swaps to offer bounties to reputable people to review your work. I could for example lock 10k usd that only Ed Witten could claim in exchange for his signature to an event announcing the work has merit. He could filter what he reviews by value and stop reading as soon as he realizes it won't deserve his social signal, cutting his losses in time investment really quickly. He has an even greater incentive to stay honest, as his reputation and future earning (inside and outside of nostr) is worth much more than any single bounty.

2025-07-03 23:05:42

- reply

I would gladly do that, but unfortunately it is not how their industry work. Theoretical physicists are not used to getting this kind of offer.

2025-07-03 15:36:37

- reply

Because all of physics just emerges from this mathematical mapping, the whole standard model and general relativity. You don't need anything else, just that 2-category defining what information means. The stable patterns emerge in the internal sector of the informational network, you don't need to define them, they are not fundamental.

2025-07-03 15:24:20

- reply

In my theory a quantum system is just a representation of a frame of reference, they just encode information, they are not really fundamental, their relation with other frames/systems is. My theory interprets strings as informational holonomies, closed paths connecting elementary frames, but they start discrete and consistent by construction, while in regular string theory they start continuous and have to be "quantized", which requires all those weird dimensions to achieve analytical consistency.

2025-07-03 11:54:32

- reply

I'm not angry at the establishment, it served me well so far. I admit I was frustrated at first, but now I made peace with how long it may take.

2025-07-03 11:43:47

- reply

Maybe, but at some point they won't be able to ignore math.

2025-07-03 11:34:11

- reply

I do, there is a huge justified prejudice against it in physics circle, specially after AI made it so easy. I did not want it to be behind expensive paywalls, but I figured out that Foundations of Physics allows me to pay about 3k usd do make it open, so I submitted a more formal version there today. I have no idea how this process work, and they will probably ask for many adjustments since I am inexperienced in writing such papers. I hope you will take a closer look after the peer review process.

2025-07-03 11:26:27

I agree that this is the most likely explanation and in general a good heuristic. I thought about it myself and only made it public after testing my falsifiable prediction of the coupling constants' entropy budget against data (my first paper). The paper could be certainly better written, but all I have no experience in proper scientific research and just want to get the ideas out because I believe they will be really impactful not only to physics but to complex systems in general.
#note1zmu…fv2l

2025-07-03 11:11:46

- reply

I wrote it with a 15-year-old unused since BSc in engineering physics, so I guess it is doable 😂

2025-07-03 10:52:45

- reply

The ideas had been in the back of my mind for years, but everything clicked just three weeks ago. Once I figured out the Bures distance, everything else followed naturally. I was shocked. I only convinced myself I wasn’t going crazy when I saw how well the coupling constants' entropy budget aligned with experimental data. These past two weeks have been mostly about rewriting and refining the explanation.

2025-07-03 10:14:03

- reply

I’m trying, but it’s harder than I thought. It seems they get a lot of spam from people sharing nonsense theories. I assumed I was well connected, but academia feels completely orthogonal to my business-oriented personal network.

2025-07-03 09:55:55

It seems like getting people to understand my theory will take longer than coming up with it.
#nevent1q…pxx5

2025-07-02 22:41:40

- reply

You can think of frames as just quantum systems, but understood here as local frames of reference. Relations is just local change of basis operation, that transform one frame into another that is adjacent in the network.

2025-07-02 16:08:14

- reply

They should stop looking at the problem from the wrong angle, there is no need for rewriting rules, the structure of the informational network as a 2-category is enough to explain physics

2025-07-02 13:25:58

- reply

You will see that strings have a simple explanation in my theory and they don't require all those weird extra dimensions, because their consistency is encoded in the fundamental discrete description. They start with continuous strings and quantize them, while I start with discrete holonomies and coarse-grain them into a continuous limit.

2025-07-02 12:27:58

I thought that, with physics being an exact science and all, it would be easier to get attention with hard, falsifiable results. Turns out academia is optimizing for some other objective function, whatever that is.

2025-07-02 12:24:07

- reply

If you read until the end you will see that there are also loops inside your brain, those are the ones probably hurting

2025-07-02 11:22:02

- reply

Here is the paper https://www.texstr.org/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqwe6gtf5eu9pgqk334fke8f2ct43ccqe4y2nhetssnypvhge9ce9qqxnzde4xy6rydfcxqunsv35vk8jrc

2025-07-02 10:00:32

- reply

It's not, I postulate a very minimal 2-category defining information that uniquely selects the Bures distance as a metric which leads to Einstein's and Yang-Mills' equations on the continuum low-resolution limit. I do not assume any deterministic rewriting rule and I actually deliver falsifiable precise novel results (like the relation of the running coupling constants)

2025-07-02 07:03:20

Your mempool is like gauge freedom, it is informationally consistent with all nodes connected to you, but no other node can resolve it. That uncertainty about the state of the next block is like quantum mechanics superposition, and when the next block is found it is like a wavefunction collapse, although this term is not very appropriate in a local framework.

2025-07-02 06:56:33

Observers separated by a horizon (a black hole or a cosmological one) are like nodes in a partitioned network. High-latency connections are analogous to observers separated by large distances: it simply takes longer for information to propagate between them.

2025-07-02 06:34:36

In my theory, observers are analogous to Bitcoin nodes. Each has finite information about itself (its own copy of the blockchain) and partial information about other observers (nodes it’s connected to). There is no global state. It makes no sense to ask a node for the current state of the entire network, only for its own state. This is the essence of finite and locally consistent information, the central idea of the paper. Two nodes aren’t required to have the same information, but to the extent that they do, they must agree on it.
Emergent space corresponds to the topology of the Bitcoin network; time emerges statistically, like block height. The internal degrees of freedom that give rise to the three fundamental forces of the Standard Model are analogous to the UTXO set. A longer blockchain corresponds to higher resolution, akin to accessing higher energy regimes in physics.
Just as total Bitcoin issuance converges to 21 million, the entropy of the internal sector converges to a specific value at the unification point of the three forces near the Planck scale.

2025-07-02 05:41:59

- reply

Thank you 🙏🏻 I'm a total outsider of mainstream physics so all I have is you guys to make it reach more people.

2025-07-02 03:59:45

- reply

I wish it was more interoperable, but due to heavy use of LaTeX formulas the only client that properly renders it right now is TeXstr.

2025-07-02 03:59:07

I finally published my paper that solves quantum gravity: https://www.texstr.org/a/naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzqwe6gtf5eu9pgqk334fke8f2ct43ccqe4y2nhetssnypvhge9ce9qqxnzde4xy6rydfcxqunsv35vk8jrc

2025-06-29 23:03:54

- reply

To be more precise with the analogy: resolution in physics is roughly equivalent to block height in Bitcoin. The longer your local copy of the timechain, the more information (resolution) you possess. So, implementing Shor’s algorithm to break a sufficiently large key would be analogous to performing a large amount of PoW (an entropy cost) in physics, not something you get for free through quantum error correction magic. In short, it would require a significant amount of energy to flatten the effective local wavefunction enough to solve large problems.

2025-06-29 22:41:24

- reply

I’m doing the final revisions on the article and will publish it here soon.

2025-06-29 22:38:14

- reply

The issue is that the idea that a quantum computer "tries all paths at once" is an artifact of the global wavefunction, which is just an approximation in my theory. You can can create systems with increasing resolution, but it comes with an entropy cost (like bitcoin mining) so "quantum supremacy" is not an intrinsic feature, just a result of having more informational resolution than other classical systems.

2025-06-29 13:41:41

- reply

I've had this same intuition for some time. We can see decentralized systems winning all around us.

2025-06-29 13:30:01

- reply

You were really on to something!

2025-06-29 13:13:11

- reply

It means that quantum computers are not special, they are just one kind of information system that deals with finite local information. The economy is actually a much better computer, since it also deals with finite local information, but it goes further by interacting with many other layers of such informational systems (cognition, technology, culture, etc) while a quantum computer is restricted to just its own level. It also means that no centralized AI will be better than a decentralized system involving multiple actors. It's very reassuring.

2025-06-29 13:00:26

Good news: my theory shows that Shor's algorithm assumption of global phase coherence and perfect resolution of periodicity (required for the quantum Fourier transform step) is unrealistic, not due to technology limitations but as a fundamental principle of physics. Nobody is breaking our keys.

2025-06-28 12:44:23

- reply

Mostly b

2025-06-26 03:24:13

- reply

Your "Bitcoin = Quantum Computer" conjecture is impressively precise.

2025-06-25 21:51:44

- reply

The theory is more general. Physics, the economy and biology are consequences. Bitcoin and even modern statistical models of intelligence are implementations of it, even without the creators realizing it yet.

2025-06-25 21:51:01

- reply

2025-06-25 15:30:33

- reply

We are going in totally different directions. I did not take the analogy that literally. I took a more informational approach.

2025-06-25 14:47:11

- reply

No, space and time have completely different nature. Space is network topology, time is block height. They are decoupled from internal degrees except in higher order expansion.

2025-06-25 14:26:07

- reply

Looks like it became an Elixir framework or smth

2025-06-25 14:25:06

- reply

Someone will certainly do that. I will write a nostr thread using bitcoin as an analogy that people here will understand.

2025-06-25 13:52:55

- reply

Not all, just the internal sector :)

2025-06-25 12:48:31

It’s a funny feeling. Being the only person who understands the universe for the past couple of weeks.

2025-06-25 08:21:07

I can't wait to finish it and share my theory. You’ll be surprised how much it resembles Bitcoin. Shouldn't take me more than a day now.

2025-06-24 10:48:26

- reply

I tried but I had no permission to do it. I've sent it to some old professors but I think none of them cared to read it.

2025-06-24 08:27:02

- reply

I am about to, just polishing it up to make it easier to follow.

2025-06-24 07:59:50

I wouldn't believe me either, but just imagine if the theory of everything was first published on Nostr.

2025-06-24 07:57:06

- reply

Your intuition was spot on, I am about to show its exact consequences.

2025-06-24 05:37:36

I thought about posting it on arXiv, which claims to be "a free distribution service and an open-access archive for scholarly articles". Unfortunately, it is free as in free beer. I'd need an endorsement to participate. That's why I vibe-coded TeXstr and published it on the only truly free distribution service I know.
#nevent1q…2dxz

2025-06-24 05:31:27

Funny how slowly information flows, even in our hyper-connected world. Five days ago, I published a novel and profound relation between the strengths of all three fundamental forces of the Standard Model, what should be "free parameters", and no one in mainstream physics even noticed.
#nevent1q…fxqx

2025-06-24 04:52:28

@nprofile…r42m and @nprofile…rypd have no idea how deep their "there is no global" observation goes.

2025-06-24 04:50:57

- reply

I cannot explain the meaning of the Plank constant without explaining the whole theory, but it is really simple when framed correctly. All free parameters emerge from few topological properties of information. It is incredible, really. I feel back just talking about it and not releasing the full paper, but I want to make sure my reasoning is clear. I think I finally have it and it will be just a matter of editing for the next 2 days or so. I am glad you are already taking a serious interest in it.

2025-06-23 23:56:19

- reply

Time is informationally emergent, just like in bitcoin, in fact every observable is. The block height (time) and the network topology (space) are external degrees of freedom that behave geometrically like gravity. The UTXO set is analogous to internal degrees of freedom that behave like gauge fields.

2025-06-21 14:53:19

- reply

I am starting from an informational perspective where there is no collapse. Irreversibility is more like in the Bitcoin sense. This bound is a direct result of one of my postulates.
I already derived both einstein's and yang-mills equations as first order approximations of the same structure. It explains the specific symmetry groups of the Standard Model, the smallness of the cosmological constant, dark matter and all the other puzzles. It is a very deep rabbit hole, I have to stop myself from going deeper or I will never finish writing it up.
It does looks incredibly similar to Bitcoin, it has probably influenced my thinking.

2025-06-21 00:06:01

- reply

@nprofile…y9lr @nprofile…4pcg @npub1s6z…wk4c