Small presentation + Opinions on my scientific articles

[EntropyFluid]

Hello everybody

Short presentation

I am a self-taught independent scientific researcher. I fully accept the fact that I am not an "official" researcher, but just a simple person who since the age of his 15, 16, has started to take online courses (MOOC, online course of the physicist Richard Taillet, scientific articles on Arxiv, NUMDAM, HAL etc ...) and who now "dreams" of one day being able to publish my work in a peer-reviewed journal. But hey, it takes time, a lot of time, but also a lot of money (publishing in open access can be very expensive, the more the magazine is known, the more expensive! It can go up to 1200 €, even if the article is only 5 pages long ...).
And in real life I am on a fixed-term contract until the end of December as a Rights Management Accountant.
Yeah. We go from researcher to accountant. It's crazy stuff huh ?!

Here. So no, I'm not a quack, no, I'm not one of those people who thinks that infinite energy exists, and no, I'm not that kind of person who says he's discovered THE SOLUTION of physics, huh . You have to be an objective minimum. It's a job that takes time, but also correspondence, working with other scientists etc ... I'm not Thanos, it's not by clicking fingers that hips, I'll find half of the solution!
PS: you are allowed to laugh at my jokes

As I am not one to hide and lie, you can look at my CV online and my different profiles and my scientific site (which is in progress, moreover, if people want to help me, it will be with great pleasure !) :
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/roman-baudrimont-9b0297130/
Academia: https://independentresearcher.academia.edu/RomanBaudrimont
Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Roman_Baudrimont2
My website : http://entropyfluid.e-monsite.com/

Let's go to serious things, I prayed!

My articles


I give you time to read and give your opinion. I accept all the criticisms, but be respectful in your remarks. I do not really like being insulted or making derogatory remarks ^^

The list of my articles are here: http://entropyfluid.e-monsite.com/pages/my-scientific-articles-mes-articles-scientifiques/

I entrust to you the two articles, in their French versions. If you have mathematical and physical difficulties, you can simply read the summary and at the end of the article the conclusion, which summarizes the different parts of each articles.

Entropic Description of Gravity by the Thermodynamics of Relativistic Fluids and Information Theory

SUMMARY: The purpose of this paper is to show a new unification approach between the theory of general relativity and quantum physics. For this, we rely on thermodynamics, fluid mechanics and information theory. We will see then that the entropy of Shannon, Boltzmann and Von Neumann can be the source of gravity, which would then be an emerging form. For that, we will first study what is lacking in the unification of general relativity and physics. In a second step, we will explain the concept of entropic gravity by introducing the calculations of Erik Verlinde. Then we will explain Boltzmann's concept of entropy, Shannon, Von Neumann and the links that unite them. Then, we will modify Einstein's equations by transforming the perfect fluid tensor according to the entropy. Finally, we will make the link of our theory with an experiment already realized within the framework of a link between gravity and quantum theory.

http://entropyfluid.e-monsite.com/pages/my-scientific-articles-mes-articles-scientifiques/description-entropique-de-la-gravite-par-la-thermodynamique-des-fluides-relativistes-et-par-la-theorie-de-l-information.html

Study of the Impulse Energy Tensor in Fluid Mechanics

SUMMARY: This paper aims to summarize the implication of energy momentum tensor in the study of fluid mechanics. In the first part, we will see the implication of the energy momentum tensor in the context of general relativity. In a second part, we will study the energy momentum tensor in the framework of the perfect fluid mechanics, which will allow us to lead in the third part in the case of Newtonian fluids, and in the last part we will see that it is possible to define space-time as a non-Newtonian fluids.

http://entropyfluid.e-monsite.com/pages/my-scientific-articles-mes-articles-scientifiques/etude-du-tenseur-energie-impulsion-en-mecanique-des-fluides.html

That's it, thank you in advance!

Good day to you,

[Exnihiloest]

Hello,

I am also well versed in this kind of subject. For me, a theory is used to model our observations. New theories are needed to explain observations that are not yet present, or to explain them better (which should result in more accurate predictions and theoretical quantifications closer to measurement results, relativity vs. Newton eg. ), or to unify disparate theories by more general principles.
Finally, the value of a theory is evaluated by its predictive ability. It goes without saying that we would not see any interest in a new theory if it does not predict anything new.

Starting from there, as there are hundreds of alternative theories, that to review them is time-consuming, I do not start any more if I do not have satisfactory answers to the following three questions:

1) What facts explain the new theory that do not explain current theories, or explain them better?
2) does theory unify conventional theories?
3) what new observations predicts this theory?

I have the answer to the question 2 since you unify the general relativity and the MQ, currently considered incompatible.
There remain the questions 1 and 3. The answers must be synthetic, factual and quantified since, as its name indicates, it is a question of physical, not just maths (eg providing the experimental protocol to follow to check a new prediction, with its feasibility ...).

If I ask that, it's because I've already been scalded, see here there is plethora, the author of the site seems moreover to have abandoned, exceeded by the task . You may be serious, but sorry, for me caution ...

Thank you in advance for enlightening me.

[EntropyFluid]

I totally agree with you.
I will try to answer you at best.

Regarding the theory of entropic gravity, in the article "Entropic Description of Gravity by Thermodynamics of Relativistic Fluids and by Information Theory", I invite you to read part 2.
In this part, I explain that Erik Verlinde found, via the equations of the thermodynamics of the black hole as well as the ADS / CFT concept, an equation relating the holographic theory (theory according to which the objects which "fall" in the hole black are "recorded" in bits on a Planck surface) and the Newtonian gravitational force. He deduces, thanks to the holographic principle (which states that entropy is proportional to the area of ​​the horizon of a black hole) that the gradient of entropy multiplied by the temperature in Kelvin is equivalent to the known equation of Newton.

His equation has already been validated by two experiments, in particular concerning the problem of the rapid rotation of spiral galaxies, whose "modern" solution was a lack of matter, the famous dark matter. According to Erik Verlinde's model, dark matter is no longer needed.
I am quoting an article from "For Science":

"Erik Verlinde's theory still needs to be closely examined. It must in particular reproduce all the observations explained by the presence of dark matter or MOND. A first step seems to have been taken by Margot Browser and her colleagues. They studied 33 galaxies that distort the image of background galaxies by weak gravitational lensing, as predicted by general relativity. Researchers compared the measurement of the mass of galaxies that serve as lenses with predictions from the emerging gravity theory de Verlinde on the deformation of background galaxies. The researchers find a good agreement between the observations and the calculations. These also corroborate similar results made by Mordehai Milgrom in 613 in the context of MOND. Another team, bringing together researchers from Italy, France and Switzerland, compared, for the galaxy clusters Abell 2013 and Abell 2142, the observations and the distribution of matter calculated from Verlinde's theory, and here too the agreement is good. "

So we have a "classical" theory of gravity which solves certain cosmological problems. However, Verlinde's equation is not suitable for calculating more complex situations (such as the perihelion of mercury) since this requires the use of Einstein's equation, a tensor equations of order 2, with within it the Ricci tensor, which is of order 4 (already there, it stings!).

The solution I proposed was to start from the energy-momentum tensor of the Einstein equation (stress energy tensor), which is in fact a generalization of the stress tensor used in fluid mechanics. I looked for the simplest possible solution, namely, a "perfect fluids" impulse energy tensor, which can be useful when we want to measure movements at the galactic level. This solution resides on a simple method of "formulation replacement" by taking the terms of pressure and mass density and by assimilating it to the known equalities of thermodynamics and kinetic theory of gases.

Obviously, at this stage, an experimental method to validate this equation is impossible for several reasons.
The first is that fluid dynamics are never perfect. It behaves rather like a Newtonian fluid. To get as close as possible to a perfect fluid, it would be necessary to define a superfluid pulse energy tensor, that is to say with a viscosity that is almost zero.
The second reason

If we come back to the quantum level, it's a bit more complicated, but there is a solution. Indeed, there is not only thermodynamic entropy, but also quantum entropy, called Von Neumann entropy! Now, I urge you to read part 5 (part preceding the conclusion).

In this part, I explain that a physicist, David Edward Brushi, had demonstrated that disturbances of the gravitational field are proportional to the intensity of entanglement of two particles (orbital experiment, see the Arxiv link in my article for more Retail).
Now, a method to calculate this intensity of entanglement is based on quantum entropy! Thus, if entanglement affects gravitation, gravitation undoubtedly affects entanglement. A sudden change in the gravitational field level could thus cause an increase in information uncertainty, or in other words, an increase in entropy.
Thus, entropy is in any case related to general relativity but also to quantum physics.

I come back to the fluid space-time. My article "Study of the Energy Impulse Tensor in Fluid Mechanics" lays the foundations of the indisputable links that exist between Einstein's equation and fluid mechanics. You can also find its information in certain textbooks and scientific articles that study Einstein's energy-impulse tensor in more depth.
In this same article, I explain the theories of 4 different authors who wanted to reinterpreted Einstein's equations in fluid mechanics. I recommend that you read the references. But to give you an idea, here are some elements that you can find on the internet to understand the theoretical impact of these authors:

Luca Maccione Stephano Liberati and: http://www.ca-se-passe-la-haut.fr/2014/06/lespace-temps-un-superfluide.html
Franck Delplace (his three videos): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8es2PHOONY Of course, I do not believe in everything he says. Especially when he starts talking about biology and stuff like that ...
luis lehner huan yang aaron zimmerman: https://www.futura-sciences.com/sciences/actualites/physique-certains-trous-noirs-rendraient-espace-temps-turbulent-54003/

I'm sorry for misspellings, I'm pretty busy ^^
If you have any questions, do not hesitate, I may have gone too fast.

[moinsdewatt]

Entropy Fluid what do you expect from this forum ?
I fear you have lost your way.

[EntropyFluid]

Hello,

As mentioned in the title of the topic, an opinion of my articles, and if possible additional proposals to improve the article or simply proposals, ideas to strengthen or develop the ideas developed in these two articles.

[sen-no-sen]

Hello,

As mentioned in the title of the topic, an opinion of my articles, and if possible additional proposals to improve the article or simply proposals, ideas to strengthen or develop the ideas developed in these two articles.

Hello EntropyFluid and welcome to the forum!
Your work looks particularly interesting and serious, but as mentioned moinsdewatt I do not think you find specialists in physics on the forum.

I just visited your site quickly and have only flown over your many publications, and the least we can say is that your research is focused on a particularly difficult subject of physics (the word is weak)!
If not and may be in the idea of ​​developed a little discussions so that it accords with the meaning of forum(saving of energy etc ...) maybe we could (what is only a simple proposition) to approach the question of the quantum thermodynamics in a profane way (there are no physicists on the forum) I think you know Vlatko Vedrall?, because if I understood correctly it is a little the subject of your research?

[yves35]

Hello,

can be go for example on the forum futura sciences:
https://forums.futura-sciences.com/

yves

[Exnihiloest]

...
... I do not think you find specialists in physics on the forum.
...

But if. And then even if there weren't any, it can make them come, and "science" is well indicated in the possible topics of discussion here.

In addition I recall that physics is the basis of climatology, and I see many people talk about the latter here. How can we talk about the RCA, citing scientific studies but without knowing physics well without evaluating them, this is the only argument of authority, it is an allegiance to the well-thought ambient (irrelevant therefore) .

[Exnihiloest]

I totally agree with you.
I will try to answer you at best.

Regarding the theory of entropic gravity, in the article "Entropic Description of Gravity by Thermodynamics of Relativistic Fluids and by Information Theory", I invite you to read part 2.
In this part, I explain that Erik Verlinde found, via the equations of the thermodynamics of the black hole as well as the ADS / CFT concept, an equation relating the holographic theory (theory according to which the objects which "fall" in the hole black are "recorded" in bits on a Planck surface) and the Newtonian gravitational force. He deduces, thanks to the holographic principle (which states that entropy is proportional to the area of ​​the horizon of a black hole) that the gradient of entropy multiplied by the temperature in Kelvin is equivalent to the known equation of Newton.

His equation has already been validated by two experiments, in particular concerning the problem of the rapid rotation of spiral galaxies, whose "modern" solution was a lack of matter, the famous dark matter. According to Erik Verlinde's model, dark matter is no longer needed.
I am quoting an article from "For Science":

"Erik Verlinde's theory still needs to be closely examined. It must in particular reproduce all the observations explained by the presence of dark matter or MOND. A first step seems to have been taken by Margot Browser and her colleagues. They studied 33 galaxies that distort the image of background galaxies by weak gravitational lensing, as predicted by general relativity. Researchers compared the measurement of the mass of galaxies that serve as lenses with predictions from the emerging gravity theory de Verlinde on the deformation of background galaxies. The researchers find a good agreement between the observations and the calculations. These also corroborate similar results made by Mordehai Milgrom in 613 in the context of MOND. Another team, bringing together researchers from Italy, France and Switzerland, compared, for the galaxy clusters Abell 2013 and Abell 2142, the observations and the distribution of matter calculated from Verlinde's theory, and here too the agreement is good. "

So we have a "classical" theory of gravity which solves certain cosmological problems. However, Verlinde's equation is not suitable for calculating more complex situations (such as the perihelion of mercury) since this requires the use of Einstein's equation, a tensor equations of order 2, with within it the Ricci tensor, which is of order 4 (already there, it stings!).

The solution I proposed was to start from the energy-momentum tensor of the Einstein equation (stress energy tensor), which is in fact a generalization of the stress tensor used in fluid mechanics. I looked for the simplest possible solution, namely, a "perfect fluids" impulse energy tensor, which can be useful when we want to measure movements at the galactic level. This solution resides on a simple method of "formulation replacement" by taking the terms of pressure and mass density and by assimilating it to the known equalities of thermodynamics and kinetic theory of gases.

Obviously, at this stage, an experimental method to validate this equation is impossible for several reasons.
The first is that fluid dynamics are never perfect. It behaves rather like a Newtonian fluid. To get as close as possible to a perfect fluid, it would be necessary to define a superfluid pulse energy tensor, that is to say with a viscosity that is almost zero.
The second reason

If we come back to the quantum level, it's a bit more complicated, but there is a solution. Indeed, there is not only thermodynamic entropy, but also quantum entropy, called Von Neumann entropy! Now, I urge you to read part 5 (part preceding the conclusion).

In this part, I explain that a physicist, David Edward Brushi, had demonstrated that disturbances of the gravitational field are proportional to the intensity of entanglement of two particles (orbital experiment, see the Arxiv link in my article for more Retail).
Now, a method to calculate this intensity of entanglement is based on quantum entropy! Thus, if entanglement affects gravitation, gravitation undoubtedly affects entanglement. A sudden change in the gravitational field level could thus cause an increase in information uncertainty, or in other words, an increase in entropy.
Thus, entropy is in any case related to general relativity but also to quantum physics.

I come back to the fluid space-time. My article "Study of the Energy Impulse Tensor in Fluid Mechanics" lays the foundations of the indisputable links that exist between Einstein's equation and fluid mechanics. You can also find its information in certain textbooks and scientific articles that study Einstein's energy-impulse tensor in more depth.
In this same article, I explain the theories of 4 different authors who wanted to reinterpreted Einstein's equations in fluid mechanics. I recommend that you read the references. But to give you an idea, here are some elements that you can find on the internet to understand the theoretical impact of these authors:

Luca Maccione Stephano Liberati and: http://www.ca-se-passe-la-haut.fr/2014/06/lespace-temps-un-superfluide.html
Franck Delplace (his three videos): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8es2PHOONY Of course, I do not believe in everything he says. Especially when he starts talking about biology and stuff like that ...
luis lehner huan yang aaron zimmerman: https://www.futura-sciences.com/sciences/actualites/physique-certains-trous-noirs-rendraient-espace-temps-turbulent-54003/

I'm sorry for misspellings, I'm pretty busy ^^
If you have any questions, do not hesitate, I may have gone too fast.

Thank you for taking the trouble of this detailed answer.
I had watched MOND closely at one time, because an alternative to this dark matter that no one ever found seemed like a good solution. However the correction of the gravity of Newton seemed to me an ad hoc modification, the GR is ignored, and I remained in the refutation of MOND which if my memories are good had been done. Have there been new since?

I looked on arXiv some papers by David Edward Brushi which he wrote on his own. It still seems highly speculative to me, especially the link he makes between gravitation and energy where only the extractable work would impose the dynamic, not the energy in general which seems to me incompatible with the GR, in addition to this one on the entanglement that would affect the gravitational field. On the other hand, he seems attached to experimental trials so when he sifts his ideas through it, it will be all right. As you say, "if entanglement affects gravity, gravity undoubtedly affects entanglement," yes most likely but it is worth checking. I will wait for confirmations from this side because anyway, my level in maths is not sufficient to make objections relevant in pure theoretical physics.