[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 756 KB, 1280x720, entropic_gravity.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16102028 No.16102028 [Reply] [Original]

This just blew my mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYSKEbd956M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1001.0785.pdf

>> No.16102053

I’ll risk clicking on your link but I swear if it’s a hossenfelder video I will hunt you down

>> No.16102063

>pbs space time video
>bunch of retards in the comments saying they don’t understand it but they listen to it because it makes them feel smart

This is what science education has been reduced to in a capitalist society. Just another product to be consoomed. Just another surrogate activity

>> No.16102074

>>16102028
Modern theoretical physics is just grasping at any mathematical concept and trying to rectify it with whatever science is doing. One by one they try every piece. It's over bros.

>> No.16102081

>>16102063
>reading YT comments
ngmi

That show's exposition is solid, of course you have to pause or roll back whenever a concept or formula is not obvious, but I feel it's a great introduction to new topics.

>> No.16102362

>>16102028
Pretty cool
I don't know what to make out of it though

>> No.16102458

>>16102362
It means an "Entropy Drive" could be a real thing powering a spaceship. Also known as an Infinite Improbability Drive.

>> No.16102509
File: 163 KB, 640x480, 1701388113212510.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
16102509

okay so let me get this straight
the "universe" (what we perceive) is a projection of a higher dimensional field, and hypothetically there are equally lower dimensional fields as well below us, and the shit we observe as being gravity is just this higher dimensional field interacting with our own?

>> No.16102916

>>16102509
>is a projection of a higher dimensional field
What? No, that was String Theory, which went nowhere.
According to this idea, it would seem the universe is constrained enough that it could be entirely defined by its outer boundary surface, which is a 2D space.
And gravity might be an apparent force, that is not due to the warping of space-time, but simply to the 2nd law of thermodynamics.

>> No.16103501

>>16102916
how can we even say that there's an outer boundary? i legitimately dont get it

>> No.16103514

>>16102063
>>16102028
I've been subscribed to it and after this time my feelings are it's ultimately a bunch of ideas that I don't really care for and that can take up your time and not lead to anything. There's no truth there. So for me I'll rather do something that will lead to something of value.

>> No.16103518

>>16103514
like goonin?

>> No.16103575

>>16102028
This is a nice idea due originally to Ted Jacobson which was rediscovered 15 years later by Eric Verlinde who got all the credit since he was a string theorist and was apparently more well-connected. In any case entropic gravity has a problem explaining observed quantum interference effects involving a gravitational field. I recall there was a post on Lubos's blog about this a while ago

>> No.16103648

>>16103575
Glad someone made this thread and gave me this consideration. You're probably correct that this isn't likely to be the answer, however I think in regards to simulation theory, encoding all your instructions into 2d topology is probably the most computationally efficient way of doing so that I'm immediately aware of. That said, it's great that videos like this exist for the sake of getting the noggin jogging. I genuinely lament when I find myself returning to consumerism upon lack inspiration to further develop my internalized models. Approximations have made for many great works for modern and ancient man alike, even if they have no inherent parallism to the mechanisms of our reality.

Now if you'll excuse my sophistry, I'll go be a psued intellectual in places it doesn't serve as a detraction.

>> No.16103670

>>16102916
>that was String Theory, which went nowhere
This idea is also based on string theory and is retarded

>> No.16103716

>>16102028
Theoretical physicists should be forced to conceive ways to economically test their theories in an experiment before publishing papers.

>> No.16103721

>>16102028
entropy doesn't exist

>> No.16103722

>>16103716
We still got to the moon by applying approximations of the truth, what a shit attitude to have.

>> No.16103724

>>16103716
>Theoretical physicists should be forced to conceive ways to economically test their theories
By whom dumbass? You think you are an emperor to issue decrees? Powerless delusional bitch

>> No.16103728

>>16103722
Implying you have to know anything that's not evident to go to the moon.

>> No.16103733

>>16103724
Protip take that spade your father jammed up your ignorant arse and bury yourself in a deep hole, doing the world a favor.

>> No.16103739

>>16103733
>Protip take that spade your father jammed up your ignorant arse
You frustrated retards going for that personal shit makes you look like weak bitches. Talk like a man God damn it! Only bitches go for that kind of shit.

>> No.16103742

>>16103728
I'm implying our conjecture, given the lack of absolution in terms of anything we've ever achieved in the spanse of our species and will likely ever achieve has still done us for many wonderful works, of which includes the fact we still got to the moon. Nobody on this gay earth can grasp onto a single absolute fact, not even solipsm has a solution and yet we still have accomplished magnificent things as species even with our crude instrumentation. You have a shit attitude if you disallow any room for internalization to make connection, even if it has no immediately reconcilable applications. You must hate fun.

>> No.16103743

>>16102028
Doesn't make sense. Gravity brings everything together, reducing the overall amount of possible states for the matter, so I would rather say its a counter force for entropy, that is always growing (globally).

>> No.16103762

>>16103742
What's the point of a theory in physics, if it can't make predictions and has no explanatory power? Physics exists for these two purposes. If you just want to do math, then just do math.

>> No.16103798

>>16103762
But it can and does, even if not in regards to applications that can immediately result in further technocracy. It's as you said, math is unto itself as axiom or sandbox and trying to expand that, even if it mostly results in applications only niche sectors would be interested in is what Academia is all about. Again, you must hate fun. This thread wouldn't be made nor would there be a publication if it offered zero substance for people to play with.

>> No.16105232

>>16102916
Verlinde is a string theorist you doughnut