This article leaves out WAY too much information to be useable. It mentions “reflections” in space, which take time to propagate, but doesn’t say anything about reflections in time. Much theoretical science is extremely complicated and unintuitive, but it’s even more useless to non scientists when “science writers” try to distill it. I get the concept, but this article does it no justice. That said, I also won’t understand the theoretical analysis of the original paper anyway, but I suspect it’s just an “observation” that seems to maybe lead to another related thing and helps the eggheads publish stuff. I’ll wait for the practical application.
I read the whole thing and have no idea of what I read.