Explaining Gravity: A Guide for Non-Physicists

[FawkesCa]

can someone please explain this like i don't have 3 Ph.D.s and 2 Masters in theoretical physics... not that's i don't have those *cough* *cough*
Gravity doesn't exist!
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1001/1001.0785v1.pdf

 

[atyy]

Just like water doesn't exist if you break it into smaller and smaller parts - only protons and electrons do. However, Verlinde's proposal is very sketchy, so it's just a proposal at the moment.

 

[my_wan]

Verlinde is a well respected string theorist, but is taking a bit of flake from his pears over that paper

I like it though. However, it is somewhat sketchy as atyy has stated.

One of the criticism I seen in the science blogs, from his pears, was the high school math used in the paper. Not really a proper criticism, unlike some others, as far as I'm concerned, but I'm not sure where to start to answer your question. Don't even know whether to start with the big picture or the specifics of the paper. The general notion is somewhat common to many different models.

 

[atyy]

Here's real criticism "Faced with these diffculties one may be tempted to abandon the entropic picture of gravity as a mere coincidence, perhaps stemming from consistent dimensional analysis." http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.1998

 

[my_wan]

Here's real criticism "Faced with these diffculties one may be tempted to abandon the entropic picture of gravity as a mere coincidence, perhaps stemming from consistent dimensional analysis." http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.1998

Ooh, thanks! New paper for me :tongue2:


Not sure how I could have missed that one

 

[FawkesCa]

heres a quandry: space is described as a "fabric" that is destorted by the mass of an object. is it possible that the "fabric of space/time" has a surface tension? and that's what the illusion of gravity actually is?
sorry if this is a REALLY dumb thought, but I am new to physics and its something that has been rattling around for a few months and i can't get anyone to address this.