Prof. Erik Verlinde - Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe

Prof. Erik Verlinde
Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe
IPS 2017 (17.12.2017)

[georgelastrapes]

I'm glad to see him give credit to Bekenstein, who did most of the heavy lifting on the BH entropy equation, although Hawking gets the lion's share of the credit!

[Deepakyadav-vpxx]

What is relationship between space dark matter and time which field is responsible for dark matter and energy

[Jason-gtkx]

My hypothesis that Dark Matter is not a weakly interactive massive particle (WIMP), but maybe is a deformation of space-time by which the curvature of space-time itself is the cause of the gravitational effect. Gravity is the consequence of the curvature of space-time when mass is present. It may be possible that the structure of space-time itself could be warped without the presence of mass. So, how did this warping occur? We believe this warping of space-time occurred during the extreme conditions present during inflation. Space-time has been shown to react like a fabric by warping, twisting, and propagating independent of mass. These properties have been proven with observations of gravitational lensing, frame dragging, and now gravitational waves. Fabrics can be stretched, pressured, and/or heated to the point of deformation. Such extreme conditions were all present during inflation, so it is plausible that space-time’s elastic nature could have hit its yield point and permanently deformed. Therefore, if gravity is the consequence of the warping of space-time, and fabrics can be permanently deformed, then a deformation could create a gravitational effect independent of mass. Thus, the unidentified dark "matter" that seems to be so elusive to modern science may not be matter at all but merely warped deformities causing gravitational effects. We have a prediction using gravitational lens mapping to prove Dark Matter isn’t a weakly interacting massive particle, but instead is a floating fixed pocket of warped geodesics in space-time geometry causing gravity wells.

[rwgeach]

ok, here comes the part where he talks about how this theory is consistent with the rotational speed of dwarf galaxies.

any minute now.

he didn't mention observational rotation of dwarf galaxies at all? hrm. why I wonder.

[kennethchow]

At first I thought it is only my intuition that dark matter condensed into ordinary matter - hydrogen atoms. Then I came across Abraham Loe, professor of astronomy of Harvard University's book"How did the first stars and galaxies form?"2010 edition, pages 45, 62, and 63, there, Loe actually treated this as a fact, not hypothesis. As to emergent gravity, there is no difference between gravity and electromagnetism, save they appear in different phase spaces, as was the hunch of Einstein when he tried to unify electromagnetism and gravity.

[edouardlauret]

this makes me thinking of Nassim Haramein's space energy theory...

[ИгорьФадеев-жш]

Neither string theory nor the big bang theory explain the birth of the universe. Relativity theory is a theory of local events for local objects. Studying strings makes no sense without understanding what they became at the final stage of the birth of the universe. If the speed of light were the ultimate speed, then photons would have a huge mass. Besides, time would stop for them. And it would be impossible to take away energy from such an object, or add it to it. If time stopped for a photon, such a photon would pierce everything in its path, burning everything in its path, or rather everything would turn into dust. In addition, the mass of an object flying at speeds close to light speeds for an observer would look like an increase in the mass of the object. In fact, the mass of the object remains unchanged. In fact, the time you need to change the trajectory of an object or stop it increases. And if the speed of an object is equal to the speed of light and time stops for it, then it will take you forever to change the trajectory of its movement or stop.
And from this we can draw a conclusion. Theoretically, it is possible to create new universes. Sorting between the created more successful options.

[rickquest]

Quantum vs General Relativity:
Pardon me I’m a novice, but sometimes it takes a novice to make a point outside of the standard dogma scientist seem to hold. I know that the Standard Theory of Relativity breaks down at a quantum level but I don’t believe the theory for gravity is actually correct in any of Einstein’s hypothesis. The equations may work in a 2 dimensional universe but would need some unexplained force of gravity to push celestial bodies down onto the fabric of Space Time. (like the images we’ve seen 1, 000 times of balls rolling around on a trampoline) It also doesn’t explain how people can stand on the bottom of the world or why the oceans don’t fling into space while the earth is spinning around at 1, 000 miles per hour. Doesn’t there need to be some kind of attraction or unknown “magnetic” force pushing equally in every direction towards the center of every single piece of mass in the universe? A force more like buoyancy when under water? (Maybe we should revisit the aether?) I think it’s time Theoretical physicist put down their school books and get crackin’ on a new theory. Yes probably one that works in GR and Quantum levels, then we can fold up that “space time blanket” and put it away for good.

[rzxwm]

I'm out of my depth. Can't understand a thing lmao

[Deepakyadav-vpxx]

You are using matter as dark matter entropy is same as matter