Derek LaMarche

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@zpfTechnologies Then do it!

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

You hope, that doesn't sound like a very informed decision yet here we are still developing it.

When will you stop using heavy slow rockets? I mean are we ready to harness the true power of light? Or will I have to wait a couple more years for you to stumble upon it... I'll wait.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

So when are you going to work on academia? Thousands of independent physicists with great ideas are sitting here getting rejected by academia we sit on more new fundamental physics and ideas then the rest of the world has.. we are waiting
@elonmusk

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@GroundedCitizen @Randomvideos107 Naw dude, it's so much fun to watch an idiot dig a hole

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@ProudBen88 @Randomvideos107 Hell no, it's so much fun to let stupid people dig holes.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@codewithimanshu He didn't steal anything if no one "owned" it.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@QBlazedog61029J @QBlazedog61029J Keep up the good work. Every time we eliminate a path, we get one step closer to the right one.

I don't see this as closing the conversation, I see it as narrowing the possibilities.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@NightSkyToday They are not a portal to another universe, they are a portal to the next universe.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

Interesting. According to my theoretical framework, LLF, consciousness could predate our universe because the Big Bang is not treated as an absolute beginning, but as a transition from a prior cosmic state. If the universe is cyclic, then consciousness may have roots extending across successive cosmic epochs rather than originating only after this universe began. Perhaps it's time we started asking whether the Big Bang was a beginning at all, or simply the latest chapter in a much longer story.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@NickHintonn Are you guys for real....-_-

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

This is exactly what's wrong with a lot of science headlines. 'Scientists found a way to send messages into the past' tells us almost nothing. What system? What experiment? What counts as a 'message'? How far into the past? Is this a laboratory demonstration or just a theoretical proposal? Extraordinary claims deserve extraordinary context, not clickbait.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

My little universe has grown to tell me:

"A structure is not born just because it has strong relationship history. It is born when the three edge relationships overlap in the present long enough to cross the closure persistence threshold."

Ill keep pushing.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

Some people build apps.
Some people build cars.
Some people build guns.

I decided to build a universe using LLF logic.

POSF Engine v0.0.2 — First Heartbeat.

The journey begins.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

Interesting result 🤔. In my theory LLF, these observations are exactly where new physics should begin to emerge. If spacetime itself is an emergent consequence of deeper temporal dynamics, then the event horizon is not just a boundary in geometry, but a transition in the underlying structure. Measuring the horizon directly may reveal how spacetime is built, not just how it bends. This is precisely the regime where a unification of quantum mechanics and general relativity becomes testable.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

The funny part is that CERN is going to shut down, and something is absolutely going to happen over the next four years. That's how coincidence works. 😄 Correlation isn't causation. As someone working on my theoretical physics framework (LLF), I'd love to see evidence of a physical mechanism before concluding CERN is responsible for world events.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

Interesting. One thing that immediately stood out to me is that your transitional velocity of approximately 1.094 × 10⁶ m/s is very close to:

vₜ ≈ (α/2)c

where α is the fine structure constant and c is the speed of light.

Numerically:

c / vₜ ≈ 274.03

while

2α⁻¹ ≈ 274.07

which is an unexpectedly close correspondence.

From an LLF perspective, this is particularly interesting because LLF also explores the idea that observed quantization may emerge from deeper temporal and resonance conditions rather than being purely fundamental postulates. While LLF approaches the problem through temporal dynamics rather than elastic impedance matching, both frameworks appear to be asking a similar question:

Why do specific preferred states emerge in nature, and why do certain ratios repeatedly appear across scales?

Whether vₜ proves to be a fundamental quantity or an emergent consequence of a deeper temporal structure remains to be seen, but I find the overlap in direction intriguing. The next step, as always, is prediction and experiment.

Nature gets the final vote.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@War_Stories_Pod So did I just watch that and not see the end?

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@WorldAndScience Banning AI is not the solution, rules and regulations are.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

This aligns closely with the experimental philosophy behind LLF. Rather than beginning with claims about propulsion, gravity, or vacuum effects, begin by asking whether highly coherent, boundary-conditioned electromagnetic systems exhibit measurable threshold behavior that cannot be explained by stored energy alone. Measure where structure begins.

[Derek LaMarche @OrianVanguard]

@engineers_feed It's time to kick it up a bit ;)

https://t.co/yAmWi3Kv13