[concerned about politics]

I think it could be a little of both. Why couldn't the quantum, which is eveywhere and in everything, have enough mass, if evenly distributed, to hold things down? It would be sort of like living on a planet surrounded by undectable jello - an energy "aura".
I understand what Erik Verlinde is trying to say. From a quantum point of view, it makes sence. From a Neutonian point of view, it can't be put on film. (I can also see why these two fine fellows dissagree.)

[Williams]

“The quantum”? Is there such a thing?

[Red Badger]

That sounds awfully like ‘ether’.........

[Boogieman]

“Why couldn’t the quantum, which is eveywhere and in everything, have enough mass, if evenly distributed, to hold things down? It would be sort of like living on a planet surrounded by undectable jello - an energy “aura”.”

What’s the difference between imagining that scenario and concocting a “luminiferous ether” or “dark matter” to make your theory work? Aren’t these just theoretical “fudge factors” used as a crutch to prop up an apparently flawed theory?

It seems like scientists sometimes try to reimagine reality to conform to their theory, rather than reimagine their theory to conform to reality.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

” undectable jello “

Had that for desert last night. My gutz have been messed up all day!

Badge,,,, this one is beyond me. I’m very interested in science, but,,,,,