You know what Axil. The Entropic Gravity theory was one of the few theories that made me step back and made me do a double take and change my view of how gravity works. It's not a coincidence that gravity just doesn't fit into standard model. If gravity is due to entropic forces of an occupied space partition, it makes sense that gravity is not part of the standard model. There is no need for gravitinos or mediators. Relativity and space-time curvature all fit nicely into that model.
If you do physics and have never read the papers on Entropic Gravity, I highly recommend you do. It may very well change your whole view on the universe. On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Here is the description of entropic force and why there is not dark matter > particle,,,hydrino. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity > > LENR will prove this theory and change science and cosmology. > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> When particles are entangled, they are connected to each other by a >> wormhole that circumvents normal space time correlations. >> >> see >> >> https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equati >> on-wormholes-quantum-gravity >> >> Space time is now believed to be connected through long range >> entanglement. The forces of nature are emergent from entanglement. This is >> why BECs are important in LENR because the nature of these fundamental >> forces are affected by the BEC. These forces are called entropic forces. >> >> Without a BEC, LENR produces radioactive isotopes. With a BEC, LENR >> produces stable isotopes. The BEC increases the activity of the electroweak >> force. >> >> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:49 AM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: >> >>> In reply to bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 12 Jun 2017 >>> 00:19:54 >>> +0000: >>> Hi Bob, >>> [snip] >>> >Robin— >>> >It’s the last sentence in the introduction that is pertinent. It makes >>> the point that the BEC >>> >Can be described by a wave function as if it were a single particle. >>> >>> Not exactly "as if". You missed the word "parallel". IOW the two wave >>> functions >>> share some properties in common, but not necessarily all. In fact he says >>> "collective" properties, IOW those properties which can be shared by a >>> collection. That doesn't include position. >>> [snip] >>> >You suggest that a coherent system state as described by a wave >>> function does include a specification of probable . relative location of >>> charge centers and/or magnetic dipole centers. What are the parameters of >>> the system state that you believe the paper considers are pertinent? >>> >>> For that I would have to read the whole paper, and I am not so inclined >>> at the >>> moment. But if you find something to support your position, and post it >>> here, >>> I'll be happy to discuss it with you. >>> [snip] >>> Regards, >>> >>> Robin van Spaandonk >>> >>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html >>> >>> >> >
