It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: visitedbythem
My Pop is an old genius research scientist. He will be 90 in a few days. I went to him long ago and questioned him about gravity. His answer surprised me. He discussed a couple theories, but He said we don't really know. Him not having an in depth answer really surprised me.
I will have to ask him his opinion on this one
originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 727Sky
That old saying "'Theoretical physics can prove that an elephant can hang from a cliff with its tail tied to a daisy" springs to mind.
End of the day through without an understanding of what dark matter/energy actually comprises, 95% of the universe will remain unknown to us.
Erik's idea is in trouble regardless of the "time scale of relaxation". If his thermalization process occurs before the neutron hits the screen, the interference pattern will be destroyed. If the thermalization is slower, the interference pattern will be predicted at an unshifted place - because gravity only arises from the thermalization in his picture - which will contradict the observations that the phases and interference patterns are exactly as shifted as the equivalence principle predicts. There's no way to escape the contradiction simply because Erik's mechanism for gravity (which is a force that we observe) - a mechanism linked to entropy - causes some inevitable side-effects such as the loss of coherence (which are certainly not observed).
[Sciencetist] argue that experiments with ultracold neutrons in the gravitational field of Earth disprove recent speculations on the entropic origin of gravitation.
originally posted by: imjack
originally posted by: frenchfries
But hey Dark matter is cool ! So it must exist
It does exist, the real question is the origin of matter and what side of spacetime is leaking matter into the other.
originally posted by: 727Sky
Verlinde's hypothesis of gravity was first proposed back in 2010 but they just got around to being able to make the first step to validate the theory. By studying 33,000 distant galaxies and using Verlinde's figures it was found that there was NO NEED FOR DARK MATTER to make what they were observing make sense.
Furthermore, there are various challenges for EG, especially concerning observations of dynamical systems such as the Bullet Cluster (Randall et al. 2008) where the dominant mass component appears to be separate from the dominant baryonic component. There is also ongoing research to assess whether there exists an increasing mass-to-light ratio for galaxies of later type (Martinsson et al. 2013), which might challenge EG if confirmed. We conclude that, although this first result is quite remarkable, it is only a first step.
originally posted by: jappee
a reply to: imjack
Wasn't it anti Trump people who blatantly propose sh!t like this... to suppose that crap like this should mix with political positions???? yeah i mean you..
originally posted by: Gothmog
originally posted by: imjack
originally posted by: frenchfries
But hey Dark matter is cool ! So it must exist
It does exist, the real question is the origin of matter and what side of spacetime is leaking matter into the other.
Could it be that like modern theory states about gravity flowing across the dimensions and universes , it is driven by dark energy ?
But for now
Dark matter/Dark energy = a singularity = we dont know wat the hell it is
Peace
originally posted by: pteridine
Note that the entire Dark Matter theory is just a fudge factor on a grand scale. It does fit data well because it has fudgeable terms within it.
originally posted by: tikbalang
a reply to: 727Sky
Can Bed or Arb explain Verlindes theory please?