Posted on 08/24/2011 2:52:57 PM PDT by Red Badger
The way gravity effects quantum particles proves that it cannot be an emergent phenomenon, says physicist.
One of the most exciting ideas in modern physics is that gravity is not a traditional force, like electromagnetic or nuclear forces. Instead, it is an emergent phenomenon that merely looks like a traditional force.
This approach has been championed by Erik Verlinde at the University of Amsterdam who put forward the idea in 2010. He suggested that gravity is merely a manifestation of entropy in the Universe, which always increases according to the second law of thermodynamics. This causes matter distribute itself in a way that maximises entropy. And the effect of this redistribution looks like a force which we call gravity.
Much of the excitement over Verlinde's idea is that it provides a way to reconcile the contradictions between gravity, which works on a large scale, and quantum mechanics, which works on a tiny scale.
The key idea is that gravity is essentially a statistical effect. As long as each particle is influenced by a statistically large number of other particles, gravity emerges. That's why it's a large-scale phenomenon.
But today, Archil Kobakhidze at The University of Melbourne in Australia points to a serious problem with this approach. He naturally asks how gravity can influence quantum particles.
Kobakhidze argues that since each quantum particle must be described by a large number of other particles, this leads to a particular equation that describes the effect of gravity.
But here's the thing: the conventional view of gravity leads to a different equation.
In other words, the emergent and traditional views of gravity make different predictions about the gravitational force a quantum particle ought to experience. And that opens the way for an experimental test.
As it happens, physicists have been measuring the force of gravity on neutrons for ten yeas or so. And...wait for the drum roll... the results exactly match the predictions of traditional gravitational theory, says Kobakhidze.
"Experiments on gravitational bound states of neutrons unambiguously disprove the entropic origin of gravitation," he says.
That's an impressive piece of physics. It'll be interesting to see how Verlinde and his supporters respond.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1108.4161: Once More: Gravity Is Not An Entropic Force
At the most fundamental, no there aren’t that many. But isn’t it considered that any thing that is built up out of bosons is itself a boson? That would mean all the kinds of atoms that exist in nature as well as smaller things.
Maybe. They only said they wrote a thesis...
So much so they made it a religion.
I don’t remember if they had to always make sure that books, pencils, glasses containing beverages, etc. were tied down.
Why is it that physicists can challenge conventional ‘consensus’ scientific theory, but climate scientists cannot?
It’s easy to confuse a portrait with the Painter.
You can argue theory. But not set in stone, verified, exemplified FACT.
Because nobody with a political axe to grind gives a shucky darn about exactly what makes gravity work the way it does?
Correct
There are things Newtonian physics can't explain that Quantum physics can. Because Newtonian physicists can't draw a diagram of how the quantum works, they simply deny their existence. Quantum physicists agree with Newton, but on the other hand, they're searching even deeper, because the world and it's miracles are still vastly unknown. There are too many "quirks" associated with the human existence for Newtonians to explain (if someone could get them to believe they exist, i.e., the human energy field, spontaneous healing, ESP, telepathy, worm holes, time space, synchronicities...).
However even General Relativity is only a model, we've a long way to go.
But the AGW climate model is TOTAL BS, it's not even close.
Johnny Suntrade
Without gravity, there would be no need for bras....gravity sucks!
Gravity: It’s not just a good idea - it’s the law.
To me the most unbelievable thing scientifically was the transporter. It seems to me if they could unscramble you into atoms then reassemble them, then they could make just about anything with the same technology.
I suppose a case could be made that magnetism is Love. The Bible says “God is love” and I think God is what holds the universe together.
A rather weighty subject!
It’s time for the SCOTUS to find the law of gravity unconstitutional........
But not so easy to put one over on the Designated Committee?
And in climate science, which is simply weather with all its chaos writ large, there are too few facts available to mankind to support much of a statement of any kind. Even if the accepted wisdom is taken about what kind of climate the earth saw in the past, who can read the ledger books that say when another ice age or melting period will become “due”?
I guess I try not to swallow demons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.