Reviewer Identity: Anonymous Ref (Theoretical Physics / QG)
Status: REJECTED (Pending Theoretical Hardening)
—
Objection 1: The “Arbitrariness” Problem
Reviewer Comment: “The author simply adds a surface term because it matches the data. There is no symmetry argument or first-principles necessity for this specific functional form. Why not
? Why not
? Without a Uniqueness Proof, this is sophisticated curve-fitting disguised as an action.”
🛡️ Hardening Strategy:
* Derive the form from the Information Capacity of a Bounded Manifold.
* Show that is the minimal information-theoretic penalty for “Entropy Deficit” (unused capacity).
—
Objection 2: The “Micro Micro” Problem
Reviewer Comment: “What exactly are the bits? General Relativity is effective; we know what the ‘atoms’ are (metric components). In DTA, is an ‘order parameter,’ but what are the underlying degrees of freedom? If you cannot identify the Hamiltonian of these bits, you have a metaphor, not a physics theory.”
🛡️ Hardening Strategy:
* Identify the bits with Spin Foam or Causal Set elements on the boundary.
* Propose that Digital Gravity is the Large-N limit of a discrete spacetime network.
—
Objection 3: The “Mathematical Illegal” Problem
Reviewer Comment: “The author claims and
are discrete integers. You cannot take the variation of an action with respect to a discrete parameter using standard calculus.
is mathematically undefined if
. The DTA is literally illegal in its current form.”
🛡️ Hardening Strategy:
* Switch to a Phase Transition Model.
* Define a smooth potential with deep minima at integer values (e.g.,
).
* The “Snap to Integers” becomes a dynamical consequence of escaping high-energy “aliased” states.
—
FINAL VERDICT
The framework is conceptually powerful but requires dynamical continuity (Objection 3) and microscopic grounding (Objection 2).
Score: 8.8 (No change until Object 3 is resolved).
The hinge is open, but the screws are loose.