Gravity is not entropic force ?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter czes
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Gravity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Archil Kobakhidze's assertion that gravity is not an entropic force, as presented in his paper "Gravity is not an entropic force" (arXiv:1009.5414). Participants debate the implications of neutron interferometry experiments, which demonstrate that quantum wavefunctions are affected by gravity, challenging Erik Verlinde's entropic gravity theory. Key points include the necessity for any gravity theory to account for observable phase shifts in neutron interference patterns and the critique of Verlinde's framework for failing to align with experimental evidence regarding mass and entropy relationships.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics, specifically neutron interferometry.
  • Familiarity with the Holographic Principle and its implications in theoretical physics.
  • Knowledge of Erik Verlinde's theory of entropic gravity and its critiques.
  • Basic concepts of thermodynamics as they relate to statistical mechanics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "Neutron Interferometry and Gravity" to understand experimental evidence.
  • Study "Erik Verlinde's Entropic Gravity Theory" for a comprehensive overview of its principles.
  • Explore the "Holographic Principle" and its relevance in modern physics.
  • Investigate the relationship between "Mass and Entropy" in quantum mechanics.
USEFUL FOR

The discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, quantum mechanics researchers, and students studying gravitational theories and their implications in modern physics.

  • #91
MTd2 said:
Yes, yes, yes. For 15, mc*logistic function, with 0 at r=0, and a non zero value at r=holographic screen. But one very steep, quite a step function.


If yes, yes, yes than 15 should be correct as well - its simple algebra. I am puzzled where does this "logistic function" come from? Ok, I think you do not have answer on this question right now. Let me now if you will be able to calculate your "logistic function", for me it is = 1. :wink:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
CHIKO-2010 said:
If yes, yes, yes than 15 should be correct as well - its simple algebra. I am puzzled where does this "logistic function" come from?

The problem is that the deficit of operator may not have a trivial dependence. For example, I chose the logistic function because it must be smooth at the origin and at the holographic screen, and constantly. Surely, you can find a constant, but it is such only in the vicinity of some place. But this approximation is enough, and taken to be null, in the vicinity of earth, and probably to all the universe of which we can see through instruments.
 
  • #93
On a further note. You seem to be much more interested than I am in defending that paper. Given that I am not even being payed for that, I guess I will leave up when doubts are raised occasionally on other threads.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
6K
Replies
26
Views
9K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
12K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K