Cosmic Cracks Bkg

The Fracture of Continuity: A Comprehensive Analysis of Astrophysical Discontinuities and Theoretical Crises (November 6 – December 16, 2025)

1. Executive Summary: The Winter of Discontent

The interval between November 6 and December 16, 2025, represents a distinct inflection point in the trajectory of relativistic and high-energy astrophysics. While the discipline is accustomed to the slow, asymptotic refinement of standard models—specifically the $\Lambda$CDM (Lambda Cold Dark Matter) concordance model in cosmology and the core accretion theory in planetary science—this specific forty-day window has witnessed a convergence of observational anomalies that resist integration into the established paradigm. From the inner solar system, where an interstellar object exhibits kinematic behaviors that defy standard cometary physics, to the high-redshift universe ($z>6$), where “naked” supermassive black holes appear to predate the galaxies that should hypothetically host them, the data is increasingly irreconcilable with theoretical predictions.

This report provides an exhaustive, expert-level analysis of six distinct yet interconnected themes that have dominated the research agenda during this period:

1. Conference-Driven Agenda Setting: The sociological and scientific dynamics of the 33rd Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics.

2. Interstellar Objects’ Pulsing Phenomena: The baffling light curves and jet dynamics of 3I/ATLAS.

3. The Lonely Black Hole and Primordial Absurdity: The discovery of Abell 2744-QSO1 and the crisis of black hole primacy.

4. Black Hole Formation Doubts: The resurgence of the “Frozen Star” hypothesis and the questioning of singularities.

5. Cosmological Gaslighting: The widening schism in expansion rate measurements and the “smooth filament” challenge to Dark Matter.

6. Eccentric Exoplanet Behaviors: The dynamical paradoxes of Eccentric Warm Jupiters like TOI-2005b.

A meta-analysis of these domains suggests a unifying, underlying theme: The Breakdown of Smooth Continuity. Twentieth-century astrophysics was built on models of smooth transitions—stars collapsing into black holes via continuous metric deformation, galaxies forming from the smooth accumulation of cold dark matter, and planets migrating inward through viscous disks. The observational record of late 2025 suggests a universe defined instead by discontinuity, “absurd” primordial formation mechanisms that bypass intermediate stages, and violent, stochastic dynamical histories.

---

2. Conference-Driven Agenda Setting: The 33rd Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics

Scientific conferences function not merely as venues for data dissemination but as the “legislative branch” of the scientific community, where the boundaries of acceptable discourse are negotiated, and the research agenda is formally set. The 33rd Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics, held from December 8–12, 2025, at Arizona State University in Tempe, served as a critical barometer for the field’s current state of anxiety regarding standard models.1

2.1 The Architecture of Consensus and Dissent

The structural organization of the 2025 symposium reveals a deliberate bifurcation between the “official” consensus narrative and the “underground” dissent brewing within the community. Analyzing the schedule and session allocation provides insight into how the field manages theoretical crisis.3

The Plenary Narrative: Refining the Paradigm

The primary sessions, particularly those held in the main auditoriums (e.g., the “Cosmology I” session in the Amber Room and “Neutrinos” in the Crimson Room), focused heavily on the refinement of parameters within the existing $\Lambda$CDM framework.

• Precision Cosmology: Presentations such as “Efforts to detect the global 21-cm signal” by Raul Monsalve (UC Berkeley) and “Time-Delay Cosmography from Strongly Lensed AGN” by Pritom Mozumdar (UCLA) represent “normal science” in the Kuhnian sense.3 These talks presuppose the validity of the standard model and seek to constrain its variables (e.g., the optical depth of reionization or the Hubble constant $H_0$) with higher precision.

• Incremental Advances: The focus on “Data-Driven Multi-Messenger Modeling” and “Modeling X-ray emission from Central Compact Object RX J0822-4300” indicates a community deeply invested in the incremental improvement of existing astrophysical catalogs and simulation tools.3

The Poster Session as a Containment Mechanism

Conversely, the emerging and structurally subversive research was largely relegated to the Poster Sessions, scheduled for the “Pre-function space” on Tuesday, December 9, 2025.3

• The “Frozen Star” Underground: It was in these peripheral spaces that the most radical challenges to General Relativity were debated. The resurgence of the “Frozen Star” (or “Frozar”) hypothesis—which posits that black holes are non-singular objects with material surfaces—was a significant topic of discussion among attendees, yet it did not secure a plenary slot.4

• Sociological Function: By placing these controversial topics in poster sessions, the conference organizers effectively engaged in a strategy of containment. The ideas are acknowledged (preventing accusations of censorship) but are spatially and temporally segregated from the “canonical” science. This allows the field to absorb the pressure of dissenting theories without allowing them to disrupt the central agenda of the symposium.

2.2 The “TDCOSMO” Pivot and the Lensing Crisis

A specific instance of agenda-setting occurred in the scheduling of the TDCOSMO 2025 session immediately following the poster session on December 9.3 TDCOSMO (Time Delay Cosmography) is at the center of the “Cosmological Gaslighting” controversy (discussed in Section 6). The session’s prominence—titled “Cosmological constraints from strong lensing time delays”—signals a strategic attempt by the establishment to reclaim the narrative on the Hubble Tension. Rather than treating the tension as a failure of the model, the session framed it as a problem of “constraints” and “systematics,” reinforcing the methodology of standard General Relativity even as the results continue to diverge from CMB predictions.

2.3 Emerging Research Tracks

Despite the conservative structuring, several “emerging” topics broke through the noise, driven by the sheer weight of new observational data:

• Axion Inflation: The presentation “ALPHA – A Plasma Haloscope for the Post-Inflation Axion” by Shriram Jois (UC Berkeley) highlights the growing shift toward axion physics as WIMP (Weakly Interacting Massive Particle) searches continue to come up empty.3

• Topology of the Universe: The talk “Three-dimensional Signatures of Cosmic Topology” suggests a renewed willingness to question the fundamental geometry of the cosmos (e.g., is the universe finite and multiply connected?), a topic previously considered speculative.3

Synthesis of Theme:

The 33rd Texas Symposium operated as a “crisis management” gathering. The juxtaposition of high-precision standard cosmology in the plenary sessions against radical theoretical revisionism in the corridors and poster halls reflects a community in transition. The agenda-setting mechanism is currently straining to maintain the appearance of a unified front, even as the “poster session” topics—frozen stars, alternative dark matter, and topological anomalies—threaten to overrun the main stage in future years.

---

3. Interstellar Objects’ Pulsing Phenomena: The Riddle of 3I/ATLAS

The most publicly visible and fiercely debated anomaly of late 2025 is 3I/ATLAS, the third confirmed interstellar object (ISO) to traverse the inner solar system. Discovered on July 1, 2025, by the ATLAS survey in Chile, this object has become a crucible for the “Natural vs. Artificial” debate in planetary science.6 Unlike its predecessor ‘Oumuamua, which was puzzlingly inert, 3I/ATLAS is hyper-active, displaying a suite of behaviors that challenge standard cometary physics.

3.1 The Observational Baseline: A “Weird” Visitor

3I/ATLAS follows an unbound, hyperbolic trajectory ($e>1$) that confirms its extrasolar origin. It reached perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) in late October 2025 and passed closest to Earth in early December.7 The object is not a simple rock; Hubble Space Telescope imaging from July and November 2025 revealed a “teardrop-shaped cocoon” of dust and a complex tail structure, identifying it physically as a comet.7

However, as the object approached the inner solar system, high-cadence monitoring revealed a series of “anomalies” that have fueled intense speculation.

3.2 The Twelve Anomalies of 3I/ATLAS

Researchers, most notably the Harvard-based team led by Avi Loeb, have cataloged a list of statistical improbabilities associated with 3I/ATLAS. The period of November–December 2025 saw the publication and subsequent debate of several specific anomalous behaviors.9

The 16-Hour “Heartbeat” Pulse

Photometric monitoring established that 3I/ATLAS rotates with a period of 16.16 hours ($\pm 0.01$ hours).9

• The Anomaly: In a standard comet, brightness fluctuations are caused by the rotation of an irregular nucleus (more surface area reflects more sunlight). However, for 3I/ATLAS, the brightness variation is dominated by the coma—the cloud of gas surrounding the nucleus.

• Implication: For the coma to pulse in sync with the nucleus’s rotation, the outgassing jets must be turning on and off, or “beaming” in a specific direction, with clockwork precision. This “heartbeat” is uncharacteristic of the chaotic sublimation usually seen in comets, where thermal lag smears out such distinct pulses.12

The “Impossible” Collimated Jets (The 12th Anomaly)

Perhaps the most physically challenging observation is the geometry of the object’s jets. High-resolution imaging by the Hubble Space Telescope and ground-based partners in Namibia revealed tightly collimated jets extending for millions of kilometers.13

• The Physics Problem: 3I/ATLAS is rotating rapidly (every 16 hours). A standard jet of sublimating gas on a rotating body should form a spiral or “lawn sprinkler” pattern as the source rotates.

• The Observation: The jets of 3I/ATLAS appear as straight, narrow beams that do not spiral. They maintain a fixed orientation relative to the Sun (or the observer) despite the underlying rotation of the nucleus.9

• The “Technological” Interpretation: Proponents of the artificial hypothesis argue that this requires “active compensation”—essentially, the thrusters are gimbaled or fired in short, targeted bursts to maintain a constant vector, behavior characteristic of a stabilized spacecraft rather than a melting iceberg.10

Orbital Fine-Tuning

The trajectory of 3I/ATLAS is statistically rare.

• The “Grand Tour”: The object’s path brought it within tens of millions of kilometers of Mars, Venus, and Jupiter sequentially. Loeb calculates the probability of such a “fine-tuned” arrival—timed to be unobservable from Earth at perihelion yet close to major planets—as $P<0.00005$.10

• The Jupiter Encounter: The object is forecasted to pass Jupiter in March 2026 at a distance of $53.445\pm 0.06$ million kilometers. This is nearly identical to Jupiter’s Hill Radius ($53.502$ million km), the exact boundary where Jupiter’s gravity dominates solar gravity.10 This is a gravitationally significant “sweet spot” for orbital insertion or the deployment of daughter craft (Lagrange point targeting).

3.3 The Naturalist Rebuttal: The MeerKAT Data

While the “alien” hypothesis garnered headlines, the “naturalist” camp secured a critical observational victory in November 2025 using the MeerKAT radio telescope in South Africa.15

The Hydroxyl Smoking Gun

On November 5, 2025, and subsequent dates, MeerKAT detected absorption lines at 1665 MHz and 1667 MHz.16

• Significance: These frequencies correspond to the hydroxyl radical (OH), a direct photodissociation product of water ($H_{2}O$) broken down by sunlight.

• The Conclusion: The detection of OH confirms that 3I/ATLAS is shedding massive quantities of water ice. This anchors the object firmly in the realm of volatile chemistry. It is, compositionally, a comet.17

• Quantitative Limits: The same observations placed a strict upper limit on technological radio transmissions. No narrowband signals were detected above 0.17 Watts (roughly the power of a standard mobile phone) at the object’s distance of 334 million kilometers.15

Reconciling the Jets

Mainstream cometary scientists argue that the “impossible” jets are likely an optical illusion known as an anti-tail or synchronic band, caused by the viewing geometry of Earth passing through the comet’s orbital plane. Alternatively, they suggest the jets are composed of large, heavy grains that are less affected by solar radiation pressure, allowing them to maintain a ballistic trajectory that appears straight even if the source is rotating.14

3.4 Refereeing the Debate

The evidence currently presents a split verdict.

• Composition: The MeerKAT data 17 is definitive. 3I/ATLAS is made of water ice, carbon dioxide, and dust. It is not a dry metallic probe.

• Dynamics: The dynamic anomalies 10 remain largely unexplained by the “dirty snowball” model. The lack of rotational smearing in the jets is a genuine hydrodynamic puzzle.

• Synthesis: 3I/ATLAS is likely a “Dark Comet” or “Interstellar Iceberg” with mechanical properties (e.g., tensile strength, porosity) that differ radically from solar system comets. Its “pulsing” and “beams” may result from a unique internal structure (e.g., a single dominant vent on a rigid crust) rather than alien propulsion. However, the “Hill Radius” coincidence remains a statistical oddity that will sustain the technosignature debate until the Jupiter encounter in 2026.

---

4. The Lonely Black Hole and Primordial Absurdity

While 3I/ATLAS challenges our understanding of the local neighborhood, the discovery of Abell 2744-QSO1 challenges the standard narrative of cosmic history. Reported extensively in September and discussed heavily through December 2025, this object is a “naked” supermassive black hole observed by JWST when the universe was only 750 million years old ($z\approx 6$).21

4.1 The “Little Red Dot” That Shouldn’t Be There

QSO1 is part of a newly identified class of objects called “Little Red Dots” discovered by JWST. These are compact, highly redshifted sources that defy easy classification.21

• Physical Characteristics: QSO1 has a mass of approximately 50 million solar masses ($50\times 10^6{M}_{\odot }$). It is located behind the galaxy cluster Abell 2744 (Pandora’s Cluster) and is gravitationally lensed, appearing as three distinct red specks.21

• The “Naked” Anomaly: In the local universe, Supermassive Black Holes (SMBHs) are strictly correlated with the mass of their host galaxy’s central bulge (the $M-\sigma$ relation), typically comprising 0.1% of the total mass. QSO1 violates this rule entirely. JWST imaging reveals no host galaxy. The black hole accounts for nearly 100% of the detected mass. It is a “solitary leviathan” floating in the intergalactic medium.22

• Spectral Purity: Spectroscopic analysis shows that the gas swirling into QSO1’s accretion vortex is almost pure hydrogen and helium. There are virtually no “metals” (elements heavier than helium), implying the object formed in a pristine environment before the first generation of stars had time to explode and enrich the cosmos.21

4.2 The Crisis of “Black Hole First”

The discovery of QSO1 forces a fundamental inversion of the galaxy formation hierarchy.

• Standard Model ($\Lambda$CDM): Dark matter halos collapse $\to$ Gas cools $\to$ Stars form $\to$ Galaxies assemble $\to$ Central density peaks $\to$ Black holes form.

• The QSO1 Implication: Black holes formed first. The existence of a 50-million-solar-mass object at $z=6$ is temporally impossible via standard stellar accretion. A black hole growing from a stellar remnant (e.g., $10M_{\odot }$) is limited by the Eddington Limit—the maximum rate at which it can absorb matter without blowing it away with radiation pressure. There simply isn’t enough time between the Big Bang and $z=6$ for a stellar seed to grow to $50\times 10^6{M}_{\odot }$.23

4.3 Primordial Black Holes (PBH) vs. Direct Collapse

The debate has coalesced around two “primordial” solutions, both of which were considered fringe prior to JWST:

The Primordial Black Hole (PBH) Scenario

Revived by the QSO1 data, this theory (championed originally by Stephen Hawking) suggests that QSO1 is not a stellar remnant at all. Instead, it formed in the first fraction of a second after the Big Bang ($t<1s$) due to extreme density fluctuations in the primordial plasma.22

• Implication: If QSO1 is a PBH, it means the early universe was “lumpier” (higher amplitude of density perturbations) than standard inflation models predict. These PBHs would then act as the gravitational “seeds” around which galaxies later coalesced. QSO1 is “naked” because it is currently visible in the brief window after its formation but before it has gathered a galaxy around itself.

The Heavy Seed / Direct Collapse Scenario

Alternatively, QSO1 may represent the Direct Collapse of a pristine gas cloud. In this scenario, a massive cloud of hydrogen ($10^4-10^5{M}_{\odot }$) collapses directly into a black hole without ever fragmenting into stars.22

• Mechanism: This requires the gas to remain hot (preventing fragmentation) usually via irradiation by nearby sources. This creates a “Heavy Seed” that jump-starts the growth process, allowing the hole to reach 50 million solar masses by $z=6$.

Synthesis:

QSO1 is the “smoking gun” for non-stellar black hole formation. Whether via PBH or Direct Collapse, the universe has a mechanism to manufacture giants from scratch. This “Primordial Absurdity”—a monster without a cradle—suggests that the early universe was dominated by black holes, not stars, and that these dark giants are the architects, not the products, of galactic history.

---

5. Black Hole Formation Doubts: The Return of the “Frozen Star”

If observing a “naked” black hole challenges astrophysical timelines, the theoretical debates of late 2025 challenge the ontological status of black holes themselves. The period saw a vigorous resurgence of the “Frozen Star” (or Frozar) hypothesis, a concept that predates the term “black hole” but is now being weaponized against the concept of the Singularity.4

5.1 The Historical Context and the Singularity Problem

In 1939, J.R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder published the first relativistic description of stellar collapse. They described the resulting object as a “Frozen Star” because, to a distant observer, the collapse appears to slow down asymptotically as the surface approaches the gravitational radius, eventually “freezing” in time due to extreme time dilation.24

Later, John Wheeler popularized the term “Black Hole,” emphasizing the formation of an Event Horizon and a central Singularity—a point of infinite density. While the “Black Hole” model became orthodoxy, the Singularity remained a physical embarrassment—a point where the laws of physics break down.26

5.2 The 2025 Revival: Kerr and the “Frozar”

In late 2025, a combination of new theoretical papers and conference discussions (specifically at the Texas Symposium) revived the “Frozen Star” as a serious alternative.5

• The Kerr Intervention: Roy Kerr, the mathematician who famously solved the Einstein field equations for rotating black holes in 1963, published work in 2023/2025 arguing that singularities are not inevitable in rotating systems. Kerr suggests that the ring singularity of standard theory is a mathematical artifact and that physical collapse is halted by centrifugal forces or pressure before a singularity forms.27

• The “Frozar” Model: The modern “Frozen Star” (or Frozar) model posits that the object is a super-dense, ultracompact body with a physical surface slightly larger than the Schwarzschild radius. It has no event horizon and no singularity. It mimics a black hole almost perfectly to an outside observer because the redshift at the surface is effectively infinite.5

5.3 Thermodynamic and Observational Implications

Recent papers have shown that “Frozen Stars” would exhibit thermodynamic properties—entropy and temperature—perturbatively close to those of standard black holes, making them difficult to distinguish via simple observation.29

• The Quantum Transition: Theoretical work suggests that a collapsing shell of matter has a high probability (order unity) of transitioning into a “Frozen Star” state via a quantum phase transition ($e^{-A/4}$ probability term), avoiding the singularity entirely.29

• Observational Test (LIGO): The primary way to distinguish a Frozar from a Black Hole is through Gravitational Wave Echoes. When two black holes merge, the resulting ringdown should be clean. If they are Frozen Stars with hard surfaces, the gravitational waves should “bounce” off the interior structure, creating a series of echoes.30

5.4 “Gaslighting” in the Gravity Community

The term “Cosmological Gaslighting” appearing in the query is partly rooted in this debate. Proponents of the Frozar model argue that the mainstream physics community has systematically ignored non-singular solutions, enforcing a dogma of “Singularities are real” despite the lack of proof. They point to potential “echoes” in LIGO data that are routinely dismissed as noise by the collaboration, characterizing this dismissal as scientific gaslighting.4

---

6. Cosmological Gaslighting: The Crisis of Lensing and Expansion

The sense of “gaslighting” extends into the broader cosmological community, specifically regarding the Hubble Tension and the nature of Dark Matter. The period of December 2025 brought new data that widened the cracks in the standard model.

6.1 The Hubble Tension and Lensing (December 9, 2025)

The Hubble Tension is the stubborn discrepancy between the expansion rate of the universe ($H_0$) measured from the early universe (CMB, $H_0\approx 67$ km/s/Mpc) and the local universe (Supernovae, $H_0\approx 73$ km/s/Mpc).

On December 9, 2025, new studies regarding Gravitational Lensing—specifically Strong Lensing Time Delays—were highlighted.31

• The Promise: Lensing was supposed to be the independent arbiter. By measuring the time delay between different images of a lensed quasar (e.g., SN H0pe), astronomers can calculate $H_0$ without relying on the “distance ladder” used for supernovae.32

• The Failure: Instead of resolving the tension, recent lensing data (e.g., from the H0LiCOW and TDCOSMO collaborations) has either aligned with the local (high) value or yielded results with such high internal systematics that they cannot rule out either side.33

• The “Gaslighting”: The “gaslighting” refers to the persistent reassurance from the $\Lambda$CDM establishment that “systematics will explain the gap” or that “new physics is unlikely,” even as the statistical significance of the discrepancy crosses the $5\sigma$ threshold.35 The data implies that the standard model is fundamentally broken, yet the “official” narrative (as seen in the Texas Symposium agenda) frames it as a calibration error.

6.2 The “Smooth Filament” Challenge to Cold Dark Matter

On December 8, 2025, research published in Nature Astronomy added a new dimension to the crisis: the Structure Formation Anomaly.36

• The Observation: JWST imaging of the high-redshift universe ($z>3$) reveals that early galaxies are predominantly prolate (cigar-shaped) and embedded in long, smooth filaments of gas and dark matter.36

• The Conflict: Standard Cold Dark Matter (CDM) theory predicts that dark matter should be “clumpy” and hierarchical, forming spherical halos. CDM simulations struggle to reproduce the smooth, elongated filaments seen by JWST.38

• The Alternative: The data favors Warm Dark Matter (WDM) or Fuzzy/Wave Dark Matter ($\psi$DM).

• $\psi$DM: This model proposes that dark matter consists of ultralight particles (axions) that exhibit quantum wave-like behavior on galactic scales. This “quantum pressure” suppresses small-scale clumping, naturally producing the smooth filaments and prolate galaxies observed by JWST.36

6.3 The Radical Exit: Bimetric MOND (BIMOND)

In response to these accumulation failures, Bimetric MOND is gaining traction as a “Dark Matter-free” solution.39

• The Theory: BIMOND proposes that gravity is mediated by two interacting metrics (geometry fields) rather than one. This modification creates MONDian behavior (extra gravity) in the weak-field limit (galaxies) without needing Dark Matter.

• Relevance: Recent work in late 2025 suggests BIMOND can reproduce the “correct” gravitational lensing and the CMB spectrum, overcoming the historical weakness of MOND theories.40 This offers a unified exit from both the “Smooth Filament” problem (no DM needed) and the Hubble Tension (modified expansion history).

---

7. Eccentric Exoplanet Behaviors: The Case of the Warm Jupiters

While cosmologists grapple with the scale of the universe, planetary scientists are confronting chaos in exoplanet demographics. The survey period (Nov–Dec 2025) saw significant publications regarding Eccentric Warm Jupiters, challenging formation models.42

7.1 The Dynamical Paradox of TOI-2005b

“Warm Jupiters” are gas giants orbiting their stars with periods of 10–200 days. A subset of these, such as TOI-2005b and TOI-4127 b, have been found to possess extreme orbital eccentricities ($e>0.4$).44

• The Anomaly: Standard planet formation involves migration through a gas disk (Disk Migration), which dampens eccentricity, leaving planets in circular orbits. The alternative, High-Eccentricity Migration (violent scattering by other planets), excites eccentricity but typically misaligns the planet’s orbit relative to the star’s spin (high obliquity).45

• The Observation: TOI-2005b is highly eccentric yet spin-orbit aligned. It fits neither the “gentle disk” model nor the “violent scattering” model perfectly. It suggests a “missing link” mechanism, perhaps involving resonance locking or a disk that dispersed precisely while the planet was being excited.45

7.2 Atmospheric Anomalies and Chemical Disequilibrium

Spectroscopic analysis of these eccentric worlds has revealed atmospheric compositions that defy equilibrium chemistry.

• Methane ($C{H}_4$) and $C{O}_2$: In the hot atmospheres of these planets (heated during periastron approach), methane should be destroyed. However, observations show significant abundances of both methane and carbon dioxide.48

• Interpretation: This suggests the atmosphere is in a state of vigorous disequilibrium. The planet’s rapid plunge toward the star creates “flash heating” that drives supersonic winds and vertical mixing, dragging methane up from the cooler interior faster than it can be destroyed.50

• Ohmic Dissipation: The intense heating and ionization also trigger Ohmic dissipation (magnetic induction heating), which inflates the planet’s radius beyond standard thermal models.50

Synthesis:

These “Eccentric Warm Jupiters” act as planetary laboratories for chaos. They prove that planetary systems are not the orderly “clockwork” of Newtonian dreams but are shaped by violent, non-equilibrium processes that leave chemical and dynamical scars visible billions of years later.

---

8. Synthesis: The Breakdown of Smooth Continuity

When viewed in isolation, the phenomena of late 2025 appear as disparate puzzles: a pulsing comet, a naked black hole, a smooth dark matter filament, and an eccentric planet. However, a meta-analysis reveals a profound, unifying failure mode in current astrophysics: The Collapse of the “Smooth Accretion” Paradigm.

For the last fifty years, the dominant models in astrophysics have relied on the assumption of Continuity and Smoothness:

1. Planets form by the smooth accumulation of dust and migrate smoothly through viscous disks.

2. Black Holes form by the smooth collapse of stars and grow by the smooth accretion of gas.

3. Galaxies form by the smooth hierarchical merging of Cold Dark Matter halos.

4. Comets sublimate smoothly as they warm up.

The data from November–December 2025 systematically violates this assumption in every domain:

• Discontinuous Comets: 3I/ATLAS does not sublimate smoothly; it pulses and beams, suggesting discrete, structural venting mechanisms.12

• Discontinuous Black Hole Formation: QSO1 did not grow smoothly over time; it appeared “instantly” as a giant, bypassing the stellar phase entirely (Direct Collapse/PBH).22

• Discontinuous Collapse: The “Frozen Star” hypothesis argues that gravitational collapse does not proceed smoothly to a singularity but hits a “hard wall” (the surface), creating a discontinuity in spacetime.5

• Smooth Matter vs. Clumpy Theory: Ironically, where the theory expects clumps (CDM), the universe shows smoothness (filaments); where theory expects smoothness (disk migration), the universe shows chaos (eccentric orbits).

8.1 Data Summary Table: The Anomalies of Late 2025

Domain	Object / Phenomenon	The “Smooth” Expectation	The Observed Discontinuity (Anomaly)	Implications for Theory
Planetary Science	3I/ATLAS	Smooth sublimation & random rotation.	16h “heartbeat” pulse; collimated, non-spiraling jets.	Internal structure is rigid/engineered; “Dark Comet” physics.
High-Energy Astro	Abell 2744-QSO1	Hierarchical growth ($Star\to BH\to Galaxy$).	$50\times 10^6{M}_{\odot }$ BH with no galaxy at $z=6$.	Direct Collapse or PBH; BHs predate galaxies.
Gravity Theory	”Frozen Stars”	Continuous collapse to Singularity.	Collapse halts at surface; No Horizon; No Singularity.	Frozars replace Black Holes; Quantum phase transitions.
Cosmology	Dark Matter Filaments	”Clumpy” Cold Dark Matter (CDM) halos.	Long, “smooth” filaments & prolate galaxies.	Fuzzy DM ($\psi$DM) or Bimetric MOND required.
Exoplanets	TOI-2005b	Circularization via Disk Migration.	High eccentricity ($e>0.4$) with aligned spin.	Violent scattering with unique damping; Chemical disequilibrium.
Cosmology	Hubble Tension	Convergence of Early/Late $H_0$ data.	Divergence of Lensing data; “Gaslighting” on systematics.	$\Lambda$CDM model failure; Early Dark Energy or Mod. Gravity.

8.2 Conclusion

The period of November 6 – December 16, 2025, will likely be remembered as the “Winter of Discontinuity.” The “noise and trash” of online discourse—aliens, gaslighting, conspiracies—are merely the symptoms of a deeper scientific reality: the standard models are fraying under the resolution of our new instruments (JWST, MeerKAT). The universe revealed in late 2025 is not the smooth, predictable cosmos of the 20th century. It is a universe of frozen stars, primordial monsters, and pulsing intruders—a universe that demands a physics of discontinuity.

---

Note on Sources: All references are keyed to the provided research snippets (e.g.6) to ensure traceability of the observational claims.

Works cited

1. 33rd Texas Symposium on Relativistic Astrophysics - CosmoCoffee, accessed December 16, 2025, https://cosmocoffee.info/viewtopic.php?t=3962

2. AASWomen’s Newsletter June 20, 2025 - Women In Astronomy, accessed December 16, 2025, https://womeninastronomy.blogspot.com/2025/06/aaswomens-newsletter-june-20-2025.html?m=1

3. Conference Schedule | Texas Symposium, accessed December 16, 2025, https://texassymposium.events.asu.edu/conference-schedule

4. The Physics of Black Holes and Their Environments: - The Center of Gravity, accessed December 16, 2025, https://the-center-of-gravity.com/documents/383/Beyond_the_Horizon-Testing_the_Black_Hole_Paradigm.pdf

5. (PDF) Dialogues about a fate of stars: from black holes to frozars - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272989016_Dialogues_about_a_fate_of_stars_from_black_holes_to_frozars

6. 3I/ATLAS Comet, accessed December 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3I/ATLAS

7. Comet 3I/ATLAS - NASA Science, accessed December 16, 2025, https://science.nasa.gov/solar-system/comets/3i-atlas/

8. New Image Shows Signs of Activity on 3I/ATLAS - Futurism, accessed December 16, 2025, https://futurism.com/space/new-images-activity-3i-atlas

9. An Extraordinary New Anomaly of 3I/ATLAS | by Avi Loeb | Nov, 2025, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/a-remarkable-new-anomaly-of-3i-atlas-420065c2cddf

10. Anomalies of 3I/ATLAS, Organized by Likelihood | by Avi Loeb | Nov, 2025 - Medium, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/anomalies-of-3i-atlas-organized-by-likelihood-af20fb3b6d21

11. Could 3I/ATLAS’ ‘Heartbeat’-like Pulse be ALIEN Tech? We Asked Harvard Astrophysicist Avi Loeb - YouTube, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcVj-MWxdPU

12. Interstellar Comet 3I ATLAS Latest News and General Information - Star Walk, accessed December 16, 2025, https://starwalk.space/en/news/3i-atlas-interstellar-object

13. A New Hubble Space Telescope Image of 3I/ATLAS | by Avi Loeb - Medium, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/a-new-hubble-space-telescope-image-of-3i-atlas-926b4c7b2dd0

14. The 12th Anomaly of 3I/ATLAS: Orientation of the Jets is Not Smeared by Rotation - Avi Loeb, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/the-12th-anomaly-of-3i-atlas-orientation-of-the-jets-is-not-smeared-by-rotation-30035318a5fd

15. First Limit on Technological Radio Transmission from 3I/ATLAS, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/first-limit-on-technological-radio-transmission-from-3i-atlas-c23bc6c1fb31

16. Unexplained Radio Signals and more from 3I/Atlas : r/amateurradio - Reddit, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/amateurradio/comments/1pn762n/unexplained_radio_signals_and_more_from_3iatlas/

17. UCT collaborates with SARAO as MeerKAT decodes interstellar visitor 3I/ATLAS, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2025-11-20-uct-collaborates-with-sarao-as-meerkat-decodes-interstellar-visitor-3iatlas

18. First Radio Signal from 3I/ATLAS: Absorption by Hydroxyl Radicals (OH Molecules) | by Avi Loeb | Nov, 2025 | Medium, accessed December 16, 2025, https://avi-loeb.medium.com/first-radio-signal-from-3i-atlas-absorption-by-hydroxyl-radicals-oh-molecules-0e0fc6e54732

19. Scientists Receive Interesting Signal From Mysterious Interstellar Object - Futurism, accessed December 16, 2025, https://futurism.com/space/radio-signal-interstellar-object-3i-atlas

20. Loeb’s 3I/ATLAS “Anomalies” Explained | AstroWright - Sites at Penn State, accessed December 16, 2025, https://sites.psu.edu/astrowright/2025/11/09/loebs-3i-atlas-anomalies-explained/

21. Abell 2744-QSO1 - Wikipedia, accessed December 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abell_2744-QSO1

22. A Single, ‘Naked’ Black Hole Rewrites the History of the Universe …, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-single-naked-black-hole-rewrites-the-history-of-the-universe-20250912/

23. ‘A paradigm change’: black hole spotted that may have been created moments after big bang - The Guardian, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/sep/02/primordial-black-hole-big-bang-james-webb-space-telescope

24. Black hole - Wikipedia, accessed December 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

25. on the solution to the “frozen star” paradox, nature of astrophysical black holes, non-existence of gravitational singularity in the physical universe and applicability of the birkhoff’s theorem, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S0218271811019906

26. Black holes - Symmetry Magazine, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.symmetrymagazine.org/article/black-holes?language_content_entity=und

27. Do black holes have singularities? - the physics detective, accessed December 16, 2025, https://physicsdetective.com/do-black-holes-have-singularities/

28. White Holes: Tunnels in the Sky? - Centauri Dreams, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2024/02/06/white-holes-tunnels-in-the-sky/

29. Thermodynamics of frozen stars arXiv:2310.11572v1 [gr-qc] 17 Oct 2023, accessed December 16, 2025, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.11572

30. We have to talk about LIGO - the physics detective, accessed December 16, 2025, https://physicsdetective.com/we-have-to-talk-about-ligo/

31. Strong gravitational lensing effects of black holes with quantum hair - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398600378_Strong_gravitational_lensing_effects_of_black_holes_with_quantum_hair

32. Colloquia | Department of Astrophysical Sciences - Princeton University, accessed December 16, 2025, https://web.astro.princeton.edu/events/colloquia

33. KBC void and Hubble tension contradict ΛCDM on a Gpc scale − Milgromian dynamics as a possible solution | Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society | Oxford Academic, accessed December 16, 2025, https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/499/2/2845/5939857

34. Universe is 13.77 Billion Years Old, Astronomers Say | Astronomy | Sci-News.com, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.sci.news/astronomy/universe-age-cosmic-microwave-background-08651.html

35. Hubble Tension: The Evidence of New Physics - MDPI, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2218-1997/9/2/94

36. A smooth filament origin for distant prolate galaxies seen by JWST and HST - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398451330_A_smooth_filament_origin_for_distant_prolate_galaxies_seen_by_JWST_and_HST

37. James Webb Space Telescope could illuminate dark matter in a way scientists didn’t realize, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.space.com/astronomy/dark-universe/james-webb-space-telescope-could-illuminate-dark-matter-in-a-way-scientists-didnt-realize

38. [2407.16339] A smooth filament origin for distant prolate galaxies seen by JWST and HST, accessed December 16, 2025, https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.16339

39. Bimetric MOND as a framework for variable-G theories – local systems and cosmology, accessed December 16, 2025, https://arxiv.org/html/2512.09353v1

40. Bimetric MOND as a framework for variable-G theories — local systems and cosmology, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398559800_Bimetric_MOND_as_a_framework_for_variable-G_theories_—_local_systems_and_cosmology

41. Bimetric MOND as a framework for variable-G theories — local systems and cosmology, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/398559800_Bimetric_MOND_as_a_framework_for_variable-G_theories_—_local_systems_and_cosmology/download

42. These giant planets shouldn’t exist. But they do - ScienceDaily, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/10/251015032307.htm

43. These Giant Planets Are So Weird They’re Making Astronomers Rewrite the Rules, accessed December 16, 2025, https://scitechdaily.com/these-giant-planets-are-so-weird-theyre-making-astronomers-rewrite-the-rules/

44. (PDF) HARPS-N Reveals a Well-aligned Orbit for the Highly Eccentric Warm Jupiter TOI-4127 b - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395969074_HARPS-N_Reveals_a_Well-aligned_Orbit_for_the_Highly_Eccentric_Warm_Jupiter_TOI-4127_b

45. Hot Jupiters from Coplanar High-eccentricity Migration - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266319805_Hot_Jupiters_from_Coplanar_High-eccentricity_Migration

46. Collins, Karen - Smithsonian Profiles, accessed December 16, 2025, https://profiles.si.edu/display/nCollinsK822017

47. Hot Stars With Hot Jupiters Have High Obliquities | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45925016_Hot_Stars_With_Hot_Jupiters_Have_High_Obliquities

48. ExoPlanet News - NCCR PlanetS, accessed December 16, 2025, https://nccr-planets.ch/wp-content/uploads/epn_archive/EPNews190.pdf

49. Bizarre Things: Space & Time - ScienceDaily, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.sciencedaily.com/news/strange_offbeat/space_time/

50. Chemically-consistent atmospheric retrievals Same as Figure 4 but for… - ResearchGate, accessed December 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Chemically-consistent-atmospheric-retrievals-Same-as-Figure-4-but-for-retrievals-assuming_fig4_380211885