> > I'm afraid I don't understand how your idea "qualitatively predicts all > features of GR without QCD or QFT." or what it means for (Feynmann diagram?) > loops to have "net entanglement coming out". I think you need to be more > explicit and precise (e.g. mathematical). The idea that GR can be explained > in terms of QFT and entropic fluctuations has been around a long time (c.f. > Sakarov). Here's a recent post of from a friend on the question: >
I read the message you posted, and it seems like what I'm saying has some similarity to what I'm saying: gravity and the other 3 "fundamental" forces are linked together. But I'm actually saying the opposite of what he is: rather than the other forces being fundamental and gravity arising from "quantum fuzziness", gravity is fundamental and the other forces arise from locally looping topology, which are more or less the "strings" of "string theory". However, the strings do not have some fixed number of dimension, but depend on the microscale topology of local space, which in turn depend on the initial conditions during the big bang. My theory also produces a testable prediction: no black holes truly exist, because no singularity can truly form. Therefore every "apparent" event horizon is really a separation of two universes, where the outside universe is entangled geometrically with the inside universe. The Hubble volume is sitting inside of an expanding supermassive black hole, of another universe. However, because of uncertainty about the macrostate of the universe, this means the "outside universe" is effectively in a superposition of all possible universes consistent with our observations. Equivalently, every "classical" black hole is really in a microscopic superposition of all possible states consistent with the outside world. However, the Hubble volume in not truly closed: it receives information one photon at a time from the "outside" in the form of cosmic background radiation, which is information being about the prior state of the otherwise casually disconnected universe, i.e. the CMB and other parts of the observable universe outside our Hubble volume. Similarity, every "classical" black hole must leak information to the outside world in the form of photons, i.e. Hawking radiation. Equivalence between the CMB and Hawking radiation implies that space must be "compressed" within a "black hole" in order to fit all the information that is to leak out later, i.e. length contraction. Also, since information comes out of a "black hole" more slowly than it goes in, this implies time dilation. This is what I mean when I say that my theory retrodicts the qualitative features of QM and GR. Finally, my theory is that gravity is the only true force, but that the other forces arise through photons going through microscopic black holes at every point in space. In fact, since black holes do not "truly" exist in my theory, *every* point in space is, in theory, a black hole, the topology of which depends on the initial conditions in the Big Bang in our section of the universe. Does that make any more sense? Please let me know if it does not. F.H. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
