BTW, remember that article was somewhat dated, and because of the gravitational and other inconsistencies the terms dark matter and dark energy were introduced in an attempt to overcome the flaws in the theoretical model.

Also there have been major advances in the understanding of this subject in the last 2-3years which should make the public arena in the next couple of years.

Understanding how a process works is one thing, but controlling it is another, there have been a lot of prototype devices vaporized in the last couple of years due to the inability to control the devices with the current technology at hand, but given time it will happen.

>>Don't worry, you ain't dumb. This is a typical reply that is made when a question is asked that doesn't fit the current (flawed) quantum model that they are using.
>>
>>In a nutshell, gravity as a force stuffs all current models, as work (the function of energy expended) is expressed as a function of distance, and with gravity there is no Delta D so in the current model no work is performed, we all know that is not correct.
>>
>>Saying that a gravitational field has no entropy is just incorrect.
>>It equates to the Monty Python saying "None for none definitely not a sausage" i.e. nonsensical.
>>
>
>Hmm. I assume the S.W. Hawking is Stephen Hawking. And when he doesn't know the answer he tends to admit it (of course, he does say there are two interpretations..)
>Best,
>Viv
>
>>>Does anyone have a clue as to what these guys are talking about <g>
>>>:
>>>
>>>Action integrals and partition functions in quantum gravity
>>>G. W. Gibbons* and S. W. Hawking
>>>Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, England
>>>Received 4 October 1976
>>>
>>>One can evaluate the action for a gravitational field on a section of the complexified spacetime which avoids the singularities. In this manner we obtain finite, purely imaginary values for the actions of the Kerr-Newman solutions and de Sitter space. One interpretation of these values is that they give the probabilities for finding such metrics in the vacuum state. Another interpretation is that they give the contribution of that metric to the partition function for a grand canonical ensemble at a certain temperature, angular momentum, and charge. We use this approach to evaluate the entropy of these metrics and find that it is always equal to one quarter the area of the event horizon in fundamental units. This agrees with previous derivations by completely different methods. In the case of a stationary system such as a star with no event horizon, the gravitational field has no entropy.