A physicist has created a mini-universe in the laboratory and tested the origin of time.

“the interpretation is complete nonsense… nothing to do with either a universe or the origin of time...” I think you overshot a little there. The paper is more modest than the university press release. It does not claim to have created a cosmos or solved the origin of time; it claims a controlled setting in which one can test whether an internally defined time variable works. Showing that a suitably defined entropy can serve as a clock variable inside a closed quantum system is not tautological in the way you present it. It is a demonstration that a thermodynamic/relational arrow can be made operational without an external laboratory parameter. That is closer to the thermodynamic arrow of time than you allow. Clocks ultimately rely on irreversible processes; entropy increase is not unrelated to “the thing we measure with clocks.” Youir “9/10 on the bullshit meter” (experiment fine, interpretation not) is also slightly mismatched. Most of the overselling lives in the press release and subsequent headlines (“Scientist creates ‘mini-universe’ to measure time without a clock”), not in the paper’s technical claims. Criticizing the hype is fair; treating the analog as worthless because it is not a real universe is the same category error which you usually attack in the other direction.

I just always assumed that everyone thought of time as being the "speed" of a interaction round trip between entities. What else would it be? And how else to explain time dilation? Baffling that this seems to not be the case!

It's going to be used to power our cars.

I'm not fat. I just created a universe in my stomach

we already have a universe

And within that mini-universe evolved a scientist who was on the verge of micro-verse technology.

Fascinating demonstration of relational time: using the condensate’s coarse-grained entropy to order events from inside the system, rather than importing an external clock. The repeatability across expansion–collapse cycles is the really compelling test.

No you should call out click bait science more often. Remember that time a scientist taught a duck to speak & every one believed it, despite the only evidence being an audio recording? It was saying “you bloody fool”. Still nobody second guessed it…

errr... duuuuh?

Sabine believes in dark matter as entropy, Black Santa not fat Santa. Existence first. Stacked, not fused. You did not grow a universe and you did not find the parent of time. A box showed that an internal leftover can be read as a clock. That is D_seq in a lab. Useful. Not a cosmos. Splitting a nucleus is the same class of leftover at another scale: one binding occupancy becomes two, closer to the peak; the difference leaves as motion and light. Not a knife through an atom. Not the origin of a(t). Origin-of-time is a pairing-name. Mini-universe is a pairing-name. Δt₁₂, 1 + z, T_prec still compute when both names drop. G_cont > S_lin Names reset. Sockets stay. The form was never divided. Grifters are drifters like the orphan in ‘the physician’ Roll up, roll up i’m going to pull your teeth… The post replies to Sabine Hossenfelder's commentary on Giovanni Barontini's 2026 experiment, which used ~24,000 ultracold rubidium atoms in a trapped Bose-Einstein condensate split by a light barrier to demonstrate "entropic time" emerging internally from atom distribution and entropy exchange without an external clock. The author dismisses claims of a "mini-universe" or discovering time's origin, arguing it is merely a controlled lab demonstration of internal sequencing (D_seq) readable as a clock from energy leftovers, comparable to nuclear splitting where binding changes release motion and light at a different scale. It advances an alternative framework where existence precedes and is "stacked, not fused," fundamental forms remain undivided, and terms like "origin-of-time" or "mini-universe" are transient "pairing-names"; notations such as G_cont > S_lin, Δt₁₂, and references to resetting names while sockets persist critique mainstream labels as replaceable. The post replies to Sabine Hossenfelder's commentary on Giovanni Barontini's 2026 experiment, which used ~24,000 ultracold rubidium atoms in a trapped Bose-Einstein condensate split by a light barrier to demonstrate "entropic time" emerging internally from atom distribution and entropy exchange without an external clock. The author dismisses claims of a "mini-universe" or discovering time's origin, arguing it is merely a controlled lab demonstration of internal sequencing (D_seq) readable as a clock from energy leftovers, comparable to nuclear splitting where binding changes release motion and light at a different scale. It advances an alternative framework where existence precedes and is "stacked, not fused," fundamental forms remain undivided, and terms like "origin-of-time" or "mini-universe" are transient "pairing-names"; notations such as G_cont > S_lin, Δt₁₂, and references to resetting names while sockets persist critique mainstream labels as replaceable.

I swear I saw this episode before

The researcher created a universe in which you had enough time to talk about it. Mission accomplished.

The problem with time is it really is measuring distance we rotate and travel around the sun. But what time was it before the alleged big bang? What distance was it measuring then? If we were born on Jupiter, what time would it be? Would we still be using Earth as the standard🤣

💕 Wow!

Lol!

Sabine, this is already solved. Pay attention

. physicist SAYS he/she has created a mini-universe . . . More stupidity paid for with government money to write a paper on the need for more government money. 4 main parts are Scam noise rinse repeat.

Correspondence with #GTUD. Selection structures available time. Interaction with matter produces a realized moment and state change. Retained history preserves structural information and constrains what can be realized next. Time is emergent from the interaction.

Atomists assume that Matter is that which persists in Time. … an assumption which is more blinding than was Geocentricism. The mechanism of Moments is also the mechanism of gravity. Nice to see some questioning and probing … even though they have no idea what to look for 😉

without true O(1) compute and infinite memory - sits high on the Bullshit Meter for me. x

@HiSohan - hehe!

In the petri dish, miniature creatures are gazing at the stars musing about if they are in a simulation--which they conclude is an absurd idea

No he didn't.