Jimster41
Gold Member
- 782
- 83
Do I understand at all what Verlinde is saying?
- Context: Graduate
- Thread starter Jimster41
- Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
2 replies · 2K views
- 15,780
- 10,656
It would be nicer if you had posted the text and references directly as there is no easy way to click on your links while they embedded in your image.
PF supports latex so you have posted it that way.
PF supports latex so you have posted it that way.
Jimster41
Gold Member
- 782
- 83
I posted as a .png file because the Daum Equation Editor "Tex" output wasn't friendly to the interpreter here. Not sure why. Still trying to figure out why the Daum Tex output is picky.
The references are totally stock. I have not manipulated them at all. I thought they would be pretty recognizable:
for "Spacetime" and "Hubble" expansion I'm quoting directly from
"Principles of Physical Cosmology", P.J.E. Peebles Princeton University Press, 1993 pp 11,71
For General Relativity statement I just quote a layman's definition, that I thought was complete enough for the purpose.
For Entropy I went to Wiki and plucked the stock "Boltzmann" version. Again I was imagining these would be pretty recognizable statements from the Standard Model and wouldn't need much reference. I am not manipulating them at all, or trying to say anything new. I'm just trying to understand what pieces of existing theory Prof. Verlinde is putting together - to derive gravitational force from entropy.
The big question, just trying to get some sense of what he's proposing: Is invoking Entropy also invoking Hubble? I thought this was the key part of his argument... I interpreted the holographic screen as a barrier between state i and state j that an ensemble even at rest in space must cross (in time), and which has the critical effect of changing that ensemble's entropy. Space is expanding, clock ticks, Ensemble's entropy has changed just because it is now spread across more possible states. If entropy is changed then there is an acceleration of that ensemble (changed relative probability of arrangement i) even when at rest, and it therefore experiences force and is considered to have mass.
The references are totally stock. I have not manipulated them at all. I thought they would be pretty recognizable:
for "Spacetime" and "Hubble" expansion I'm quoting directly from
"Principles of Physical Cosmology", P.J.E. Peebles Princeton University Press, 1993 pp 11,71
For General Relativity statement I just quote a layman's definition, that I thought was complete enough for the purpose.
For Entropy I went to Wiki and plucked the stock "Boltzmann" version. Again I was imagining these would be pretty recognizable statements from the Standard Model and wouldn't need much reference. I am not manipulating them at all, or trying to say anything new. I'm just trying to understand what pieces of existing theory Prof. Verlinde is putting together - to derive gravitational force from entropy.
The big question, just trying to get some sense of what he's proposing: Is invoking Entropy also invoking Hubble? I thought this was the key part of his argument... I interpreted the holographic screen as a barrier between state i and state j that an ensemble even at rest in space must cross (in time), and which has the critical effect of changing that ensemble's entropy. Space is expanding, clock ticks, Ensemble's entropy has changed just because it is now spread across more possible states. If entropy is changed then there is an acceleration of that ensemble (changed relative probability of arrangement i) even when at rest, and it therefore experiences force and is considered to have mass.
Last edited: