From: JeffRelf.F-M.FM on

<PRE>
Observations/Mesurements suggest <A hRef="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#Positive_cosmological_constant">a positive cosmological constant</A> constant
that's consistent with my premise:
Entropy ( dissipation, <A hRef="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exergy">lost eXergy</A> ) is the fifth dimension.

Further observations/measurements COULD falsify this premise.

For example, I'd be wrong if “dark energy” were a REAL form of energy,
not entropy, not “a VIRTUAL 'deficit' owed to the vacuum”.

From the human perspective, mass in an IDEAL* black hole
is exactly ZERO feet wide; yet, inside, it's infinitely wide.
( *: nature has only “apparent” black holes, not real ones )

Why so narrow ? because, there, space·time is infinitely warped.

After entropy has polished it off, after its eXergy has been consumed,
that sub·narrow bit of warped space is ELONGATED.

Same for the Universe as a whole, it's expanding;
“length” accrues because entropy accrues.
From: J. Clarke on
On 4/11/2010 3:47 PM, JeffRelf.F-M.FM @. wrote:
> Observations/Mesurements suggesta positive cosmological constant <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant#Positive_cosmological_constant> constant
> that's consistent with my premise:
> Entropy ( dissipation,lost eXergy <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exergy> ) is the fifth dimension.
>
> Further observations/measurements COULD falsify this premise.
>
> For example, I'd be wrong if “dark energy” were a REAL form of energy,
> not entropy, not “a VIRTUAL 'deficit' owed to the vacuum”.
>
> From the human perspective, mass in an IDEAL* black hole
> is exactly ZERO feet wide; yet, inside, it's infinitely wide.
> ( *: nature has only “apparent” black holes, not real ones )
>
> Why so narrow ? because, there, space·time is infinitely warped.
>
> After entropy has polished it off, after its eXergy has been consumed,
> that sub·narrow bit of warped space is ELONGATED.
>
> Same for the Universe as a whole, it's expanding;
> “length” accrues because entropy accrues.

ROF,L.

If you don't want people to laugh at you then don't post made-up physics
on a physics forum.

Show us how your model is completely consistent with known observation.
Show us that it gives us something that conventional physics doesn't.
If you don't know how to do that then don't expect people to take you
seriously.