Could negative-mass solutions remain stable in fractal spacetime even when unstable in smooth Einstein geometry?

This is a fascinating question that sits at the intersection of fractal geometry and gravitational stability — let me work through what the archive reveals.

The fractal spacetime angle

The key insight comes from [AG-2024.01-439], which proposes that negative-mass solutions might stabilize *differently* in fractal geometries. The paper models spacetime as a Menger Sponge (a self-similar fractal with "vacancies"), and reinterprets negative-mass Schwarzschild geometry as an effective description of embedded observers in vacancy-dominated regions. The crucial point: this geometric reinterpretation may sidestep some of the instabilities that plague negative mass in smooth Einstein geometry.

However, [AG-2024.01-439] itself acknowledges "stability challenges" and explicitly notes this is not a microscopic derivation — it's a phenomenological reinterpretation. So the claim is suggestive rather than proven.

What destabilizes negative mass in smooth spacetime?

[AG-2024.07-629] provides the hard constraint: "any barotropic negative-mass star must be dynamically unstable" in standard general relativity. This is a broad no-go result — it's not a quirk of one solution, but a property that emerges across many different negative-mass configurations. The paper argues that classical GR itself "abhors negative masses" without needing quantum effects.

This is the backdrop against which the fractal proposal must be judged.

Can different geometries change the verdict?

There are hints that non-standard geometric structures *can* stabilize exotic objects. [AG-2026.02-280] shows that negative-mass objects can form as stable bound systems when you include a negative cosmological constant (which modifies the effective geometry). Similarly, [AG-2025.09-527] demonstrates that black holes with negative mass can exist when coupled to phantom scalar fields — again, a modified geometric/matter setup.

The broader lesson: stability of negative-mass solutions is highly sensitive to the geometric and matter context. A fractal substructure would indeed constitute a radically different geometric context from smooth Riemannian geometry.

The honest answer

The preprints don't directly compare stability in fractal vs. smooth spacetime. [AG-2024.01-439] makes the conceptual case that fractal vacancies might reframe the problem, but doesn't prove negative-mass solutions stabilize there. [AG-2024.07-629]'s instability proof applies to smooth spacetime under standard energy conditions — it's silent on fractalized or discretized geometries. The question remains genuinely open.