Not a Tired-Light Model: Affine Geometric Stretch with Local Remission and Conserved Energy Lmax_v11: Photon-Stretch Geometry, Affine-Parameter Cosmology Fundamental Affine Parameter Ψ(d,Φ,B) = 1 - d/Lmax(Φ,B) Ψ measures the remaining geometric span available to a photon relative to the local affine limit. All observable quantities derive from Ψ. (1) Interaction & Survival ρI(d,Φ,B) = E0/d · Ψ Psurv = Ψ Lmax(Φ,B) = 72 Gly · (1 - Φ/c² - βB·B²/B0²) t = d/c Note: Φ = local gravity, B = magnetism. Voids → Lmax ≈ 72 Gly. Clusters → Lmax ↓. (2) Redshift & Distance 1 + z = 1/Ψ d(z) = Lmax · z/(1 + z) t = d/c Redshift measures geometric dilation relative to Lmax. Gravity suppresses Lmax; voids preserve it. (3) Light Path d = d0 · (1 + κ + κΦ + κB) t = d/c κΦ = gravity stretch. κB = magnetic twist. Path terms are averaged over field variations. (4) Flux / Dimming F = L0/(4πd²) · Ψ² Geometric spreading and affine dilation are both controlled by Ψ. (5) Angular Size θ = Dphys/d d already includes κΦ and κB corrections. Time-averaged fields preserve angular sharpness. (6) Edge Condition Ψ(d = Lmax) = 0 Psurv(d = Lmax) = 0 tmax = Lmax/c The affine boundary is not uniform. Clusters ≈ 71 Gly. Voids ≈ 76 Gly. (7) Lensing Deflection α = 4GM/(c²b) + αB Mass bends the path and contributes to Φlocal, reducing Lmax. Magnetic fields contribute αB. (8) Lens Equation β = θ - (dls/ds)(α + αB) dls and ds already include κΦ and Φlocal effects. (9) Magnification μ = 1 / |(1 - κlens - κB)² - γ²| Fobs = μL0/(4πd²) · Ψ² Magnification, shear, and affine dimming remain coupled through κlens, κB, and Lmax. (10) Local Remission Llocal = 1 - ηεβB Atomic-scale remission behaviour. βB provides the bridge between local processes and global Lmax structure. (11) Conservation η = 1 ⇒ Nγ,out ≥ 0 Energy is conserved. Photons are continually absorbed and re-emitted, with wavelength and path evolution governed by local Φ and B conditions. Not a Tired-Light Model: Affine Geometric Stretch with Local Remission and Conserved Energy Lmax_v11 attributes cosmological redshift and flux dimming to progressive geometric dilation of the photon’s electromagnetic field as it approaches a finite affine-parameter limit \(L_{\max}(\Phi,B)\). The governing quantity is the remaining span so that \(1+z=1/\Psi\) and flux scales with \(\Psi^2\). Unlike classic tired-light proposals, which remove energy from the photon itself, the framework maintains strict energy conservation (Eq. 11: \(\eta=1\implies N_{\gamma,\rm out}\ge0\)). Photons are continually absorbed and re-emitted; wavelength and path evolution are set by the local gravitational potential \(\Phi\) and magnetic field \(B\). Any residue that appears at the affine boundary is treated as a non-radiative geometric contribution, not an irreversible energy sink. The dual-frame construction further separates a local “birth” redshift (recovering standard GR/SR factors) from the transit stretch, keeping the accounting closed while preserving the raw observational catalogues.

RE: The claim that TSMC will enter memory and disrupt the big three memory makers This doesn't make sense. As far as I know, TSMC has been working on this project for more than five years, but it would be a mistake to assume what they're building is commodity DRAM. TSMC has no DRAM IP, no DRAM patents, and none of the relevant technology. I think the term "3D DRAM" is what's causing the misunderstanding. After talking with industry experts, I believe this is the correct way to read the reports of TSMC entering DRAM. TSMC's earlier published research gives a good sense of the direction. At the 2025 VLSI Symposium, TSMC presented a memory technology based on oxide semiconductors, using a cell made of one transistor and one capacitor (1T1C). The goal was to integrate this memory into advanced logic chips and give processors a cache with low power and low latency. The key feature of the design is that the memory array is built directly into the back end of line (BEOL) interconnect layers of the logic chip. Conventional DRAM is manufactured as a separate chip. To build the memory array in the interconnect layers of an advanced logic chip, TSMC used select transistors with an oxide semiconductor channel and capacitors fabricated with a low temperature process. According to TSMC, the test chip, which integrates memory and logic on a single die, operated at 0.75V. Data retention exceeded 128ms, random read/write cycle time was under 8ns, and endurance was above 10¹⁴ cycles. TSMC positioned the technology as a processor cache that offers higher density than SRAM while keeping power consumption and latency low. So TSMC would be producing 3D DRAM as a next generation technology to replace SRAM. And not in large volumes, either. Anyone saying TSMC will make DDR or LPDDR has no idea what they're talking about.

Re @GigaLegendsLTD 1. We aren’t running any collabs because any form of additional spots beyond the conversion of existing assets would just dilute the conversion rate. 2. ROMs will convert to Legends via a points system. There will be a few options for ppl without enough points, or with a surplus of points, these include... (a) gacha system for points (b) gacha system for full ROMs (c) other wallets can send you their points 3. I’m excited to see how (c) plays out - our community is already discussing some adhoc tournies in Discord to distribute their extra points. But what I’m even more excited about is not selling any additional NFTs. Infact, the launch of Legends will result in a massive amount of consolidation / supply contraction in our ecosystem. At some point every onchain team / business needs to grow up and work towards sustainable long term revenue that’s not driven by short term speculation or just printing more supply. That’s the theme of our now, and going in to 2027.

Re Binance hack: the specifics are not clear yet - so, just a general statement about crypto: there is no good use case when moving billions needs to happen in a few seconds. We need delays and rate limits everywhere - this is the only way to make the system safe.

Re is bringing an interesting alternative to RWA yield, one that is less correlated to markets and instead is based on real reinsurance activity. We sat down with @karnsaroya to discuss reinsurance as an alternative to current RWA yield and @re's role. 📆 Wed 04 Nov 3 pm UTC

Re:Build CEO Miles Arnone (@ReBuildMFG) argues manufacturers are putting too much faith in robotics to improve efficiency. "The problem with robots is that they're attacking a pretty small part of the total production cost. It's largely the elimination of direct labor." "Bringing robots in might take a few percentage points off your total cost at a very high capital expense." "You're much better off trying to implement something like Toyota's lean production system to eliminate all the steps along the way that are wasteful, that don't add value to the product." "In the U.S., we're very techno-centric and we like big step-change improvements. We want robots instead of grinding it out and every week just pulling a quarter or a half percent of the cost basis out by getting a little more efficient." "The 'I'm going to put robots here, get rid of all my labor, and all of a sudden I've solved my problems' approach won't happen."

Re: FT OpenAI headline chaos. CNBC just reported on air, according to a source familar: $70 billion ARR includes "revenue sharing from their big partners" (think AMZN, MSFT). "The way that they [OpenAI] have been reporting revenue has included some of these partnership deals" The $50 billion ARR figure strips out those partnership deals.