http://www.uva.nl/en/news-events/ne...ory-of-gravity-might-explain-dark-matter.html

interesting to read. a potential way to unit relativity and quantum physics.

potential issues with particle / wave duality. but a step forward from eistein / newton. next 10-20 years would be interesting for theoretic physics, as what we know about the world around us could be completely upended.

 

using information exchanges to explain the world isn't new. Susskind is a pioneer in that branch and you may find this book helpful:

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Information-String-Theory-Revolution/dp/9812561315

 

What happen to the dogma that the QM and GRT are the most proven theories of all time. These theories have been proven time after time for decades. Right?

Everytime someone from outside the "click" proposes a different explanation....they are labeled a crackpot.

I recognized academic deceit and bullshit decades ago. This is just more of the same. Nature does not use man's concept of information. The scientists get more ignorant every year. Modern science hasn't a clue on how the universe works. Not a clue. All of these modern theories is a pathetic exercise in ignorance.

And I love it, because they get the answers they deserve. Modern science are the crackpots.

No one will never understand nature trying to use man made symbol manipulation procedures.

Force is more than magnitude and radial direction. It has a velocity rate ( and therefore a magnitude rate) and a duration. But what they have missed is that force has a torque component. Electric, magnetic and gravity forces, all have torque.

Nature is ONLY force and the reaction to it. Nothing more.

 

What happen to the dogma that the QM and GRT are the most proven theories of all time.

the notion of "settled science" is most popular among the religious folks, like those "climate scientists" or the tree huggers who know nothing about science.

No one will never understand nature

philosophers for ages have pondered that question and will continue to do so for ages. I think the answer depends on your definition of "understand". I think we can certainly understand certain aspects of the universe to certain degrees: we understand how trees grow, objects fall, etc.

it is questionable if we can *exhaustively* understand the universe, or if there is a "static" understanding of the universe - it is entirely possible what the universe is or how it works changes over time / dimension / other aspects: the laws of physics change over time, and may change over location / dimension as well.

so it is likely a "full understanding" of the universe is the limit that we will continue to approach but will never get there.

 

BR-549, I had no idea what you are continually ranting on about, but you should definitely get a Nobel Prize since you are apparently the only one who understands the universe.

 

the notion of "settled science" is most popular among the religious folks, like those "climate scientists" or the tree huggers who know nothing about science.
.

Religious folks and climate scientists?

Excuse my language but did you hit your head as a child?

 

The scientist that will be the ruler of US's moral climate.

 

I know that this song ain't a Christmas one. We may have our differences, yet Merry Christmas Danny.