Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What’s interesting to me is that this result shares something with the relativistic theory of gravity:

That is, that gravity is a side-effect of the fact that time moves more slowly closer to centers of mass, which causes the velocity vector of an object moving in space to turn in the direction of the time-speed gradient in space.



This is misleading / incomplete. Curviture in the time dimension is not enough to explain gravity. Gravity is caused by curviture in spacetime (4D). It's definitely not intuitive to think about the time dimension (and so makes for a good youtube video), but this "theory" you're talking about isn't anything that wasn't already known when GR was first introduce.

I'm not sure if you just meant GR and "accounts for some of gravity", but it's a common mistake I've seen people make after some youtube videos on the subject.

See https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/609217/how-much-...


Aren’t there formulations which do away with space-time by treating it as an emergent feature?


Yep, you're probably thinking of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropic_gravity and/or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER_%3D_EPR, but there are other similar proposals as well.

There's enough interesting connections between entanglement and spacetime that it's an interesting area to prod for sure.


There is a quantity that nature likes to minimize, which makes it so. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stationary-action_principle


Thanks. That led to a minor reading on a very colorful character: https://21sci-tech.com/Articles%202004/Spring2004/Maupertuis...




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: