The Cumulative Delay Principle (CDP) and Relativistic Kinematics in the Theory of Entropicity (ToE)

The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) proposes that all events, interactions, and causal influences require a finite propagation interval, (\Delta t), and cannot occur instantaneously. The Cumulative Delay Principle (CDP) formalizes this universal delay and operates in tandem with the Entropic Resistance Principle (ERP) to define the causal structure of the entropic field.

Key Aspects of the CDP

Finite Speed of Information

All forms of interaction and information transfer are limited by a maximum speed. This reflects the finite responsiveness of the universe’s underlying entropic field.

Maximum Rate of Entropic Rearrangement

The speed of light, (c), is not treated as a postulate of spacetime (as in Einstein’s relativity), but rather as the maximum possible rate at which the entropic field can rearrange itself. This emerges directly from the CDP.

Foundation for Relativistic Effects

The CDP provides a natural explanation for the relativistic speed barrier. As an object’s velocity increases, its internal entropy is redistributed to resist further acceleration. This entropic diversion produces time dilation, mass increase, and ultimately enforces the universal speed limit at (c).

Distinguishing from the Theory of Evolution

It is important to emphasize that the Theory of Entropicity and the Theory of Evolution are entirely unrelated.

In physics, ToE uses the CDP to explain mass, time, gravity, and motion in terms of entropic fields.

In biology, the Theory of Evolution explains how species change over time through mechanisms such as natural selection. While evolutionary biology sometimes discusses adaptive delays or evolutionary lag, these are not equivalent to the Cumulative Delay Principle.

This framing makes CDP stand out as a causal axiom of ToE, while also preventing confusion with biological theories.

Philosophical Shockwave

 All the above has profound implications:

Profound implications: contrasting Einstein’s spacetime structure with the Theory of Entropicity’s computational reinterpretation

Question	Einstein’s Framework	ToE’s Framework
Why does time slow?	Consequence of Lorentz geometry: moving clocks tick more slowly due to the constancy of light speed in Minkowski spacetime	Entropic bandwidth: entropy cannot update fast enough
Why more mass at high speed?	Relativistic energy–momentum relation: rest mass is invariant, but energy and momentum grow with velocity (historically described as “relativistic mass increase”)	Identity‑preservation cost: growing entropic resistance manifests as effective mass increase
Why does length shrink?	Lorentz transformation effect: moving objects are measured shorter along the direction of motion (a real, physical consequence, not just coordinates)	Entropic stability need: contraction preserves structural stability under entropic constraints
Why is light speed constant?	Einstein’s second postulate: the speed of light is invariant in all inertial frames	Maximum update speed: the ultimate rate at which entropy can propagate

Mass is constrained entropy resisting change. Faster motion adds more resistance. Therefore, mass increase becomes entropic drag.

One Principle, Three Relativistic Effects: Contrasting Einstein’s Framework with the Theory of Entropicity (ToE)

Effect	Einstein’s Framework (Special Relativity)	Theory of Entropicity (ToE)
Time Dilation	Consequence of Lorentz geometry: moving clocks tick more slowly due to the constancy of light speed in Minkowski spacetime	Entropy provides the mechanism: clocks slow because the entropic field cannot update states fast enough when motion consumes part of the system’s “update budget,” producing a slowdown in observed processes
Length Contraction	Lorentz transformation effect: moving objects are measured shorter along the direction of motion, due to relativity of simultaneity (a real, physical consequence, not just coordinates)	Entropy explains why contraction is stable: structures contract because the entropic field optimizes stability under motion, minimizing constraint while preserving identity.
Mass Increase	Relativistic energy--momentum relation: rest mass is invariant, but energy and momentum grow with velocity, historically described as ``relativistic mass increase''	Entropy supplies the physical resistance: as velocity rises, the entropic field resists further updates, manifesting as an effective increase in inertial mass.

What Einstein saw as structure, ToE sees as computation. Einstein described the geometry of relativity; ToE proposes the entropic computation that generates that geometry.:

• Einstein’s relativity interprets the phenomena (time dilation, length contraction, energy–momentum scaling) as consequences of the structure of spacetime: the geometry of Minkowski space and the invariance of the speed of light.

• The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) re‑casts those same phenomena as consequences of computation or information processing limits: entropy update rates, stability optimization, and entropic resistance.

This thus presents us with a clear philosophical shift: from a geometric ontology of Relativity to an informational/computational ontology of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). 

EXPOSITORY AND CLARIFICATION NOTES

The Two Languages of Mass in Relativity

• Relativistic mass (older language): Define $m_{\text{rel}}=\gamma m_{0}m\_\{\backslash text\{rel\}\}\; =\; \backslash gamma\; m\_0$. Then $p=m_{\text{rel}}vp\; =\; m\_\{\backslash text\{rel\}\}\; v$, $E=m_{\text{rel}}{c}^{2}E\; =\; m\_\{\backslash text\{rel\}\}\; c^2$. As $v\to cv\; \backslash to\; c$, $m_{\text{rel}}\to \mathrm{\infty }m\_\{\backslash text\{rel\}\}\; \backslash to\; \backslash infty$. → This makes it sound like the particle’s mass itself is growing.

• Invariant mass (modern language): Keep $m_{0}m\_0$ fixed. Write

$$E^2=(pc{)}^2+(m_0{c}^2{)}^2\mathrm{.}E^2\; =\; (pc)^2\; +\; (m\_0\; c^2)^2.$$

As $v\to cv\; \backslash to\; c$, $pp$ and $EE$ diverge, but $m_{0}m\_0$ stays constant. → This keeps “mass” as a fixed property of the particle, and puts all the velocity‑dependence into energy and momentum.

2. Why modern physicists prefer the invariant view

• Clarity in experiments: In accelerators, the rest mass of the electron or proton is always measured the same. What grows is their energy and momentum.

• Consistency in relativity: Invariant mass is the same in all frames, which makes it a cleaner quantity for 4‑vector formulations.

• Avoiding confusion: If you say “mass increases,” people often think the particle is literally gaining substance, which isn’t the case.

3. Why “relativistic mass” isn’t wrong

• It’s not mathematically wrong. If you define $m_{\text{rel}}=\gamma m_{0}m\_\{\backslash text\{rel\}\}\; =\; \backslash gamma\; m\_0$, all the formulas of ToE and SR work out.

• It’s just a different bookkeeping convention.

• The physics is the same: as speed increases, the particle resists acceleration more and more, and you can’t reach $cc$.

⚖️ The bottom line

• Saying “relativistic mass increases” is not wrong — it’s just an older convention.

• Saying “rest mass is invariant, energy increases” is the modern convention.

• Both describe the same reality: you need infinite energy to reach $cc$.

👉 The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) describes “mass increase” as an entropic resistance effect — this is equivalent to the modern statement that energy and momentum grow without bound while invariant mass stays constant. 

This is the philosophical tension between relativity’s “geometry‑only” account and ToE’s “entropy‑driven” account. Let us unpack the two positions carefully:

🔹 In Einstein’s Relativity

• Energy increase: Comes from the work done by whatever is accelerating the particle (an electric field in an accelerator, for example). That work goes into the particle’s relativistic energy $E=\gamma m_0{c}^{2}E\; =\; \backslash gamma\; m\_0\; c^2$.

• Why not call it mass increase? Because the invariant rest mass $m_{0}m\_0$ is the same in all frames. The growth is in the Lorentz factor $\gamma \backslash gamma$, which multiplies energy and momentum.

• What “causes” time dilation and length contraction? Nothing “causes” them in the mechanistic sense. They are geometric consequences of the structure of spacetime and the invariance of $cc$.

  • Time dilation: different observers slice spacetime differently.

  • Length contraction: relativity of simultaneity.

  • Energy growth: the geometry of Minkowski space forces the relation $E^2=(pc{)}^2+(m_0{c}^2{)}^{2}E^2\; =\; (pc)^2\; +\; (m\_0\; c^2)^2$.

So relativity doesn’t say “velocity itself causes energy to increase.” It says: once you accept the postulates (invariance of $cc$, relativity principle), the geometry dictates these relations. The “increase” is not a physical substance being added, but a geometric necessity.

🔹 In ToE’s Framing

• Entropy as substrate: Mass is not a fixed invariant but an emergent property of the entropic field. As velocity rises, the field must allocate more entropy to preserving identity (effective inertia), leaving less for temporal updating (time dilation).

• Why this interpretation of ToE feels more “realistic”: Instead of saying “it’s just geometry,” ToE says there is a physical field (entropy) that enforces the limits.

• Absolute check: ToE demands that even if two observers see themselves as mutually at rest, the entropic field itself “knows” their absolute relation to the entropy substrate. If both are near $cc$, the field enforces squashing (contraction, dilation, resistance, etc.).

⚖️ Where the Philosophical Clash Lies

• Relativity: purely relational, no absolute substrate. Motion is only relative, and all effects are coordinate‑dependent but physically measurable.

• ToE: introduces an absolute entropic field that underlies and enforces the relativistic effects. This is a deeper ontology: geometry is the shadow; entropy is the cause.

✅ ToE's Position

• Relativity is not “wrong,” but is “incomplete.”

• Relativity describes what happens (geometry, invariants).

• ToE proposes why it happens (entropy as the generative field).

• The Lorentz factor is correct. But the reason it appears is because entropy is being reallocated between mass, time, and structure.”

Hence:

• In relativity, the “extra energy” comes from the work done by the accelerator, and it manifests as increased momentum/energy in Minkowski geometry.

• In ToE, that same growth is interpreted as the entropic field regenerating more inertia at the cost of temporal updating.

👉The question for ToE is: why can't the accelerators measure the increase in mass due to entropy?

That goes right to the heart of how ToE differs from relativity’s language.

🔹 Why accelerators don’t “see” mass increase in the standard picture

• In modern high‑energy physics, what accelerators measure directly are rest mass, momentum, and energy.

• The rest mass of an electron, proton, or muon is always the same, no matter how fast it goes. That’s why accelerator physicists say “mass is invariant.”

• What grows with velocity is the energy and momentum:

$$E=\gamma m_0{c}^2,p=\gamma m_{0}vE\; =\; \backslash gamma\; m\_0\; c^2,\; \backslash quad\; p\; =\; \backslash gamma\; m\_0\; v$$

with $\gamma =1\mathrm{/}\sqrt{1-v^2\mathrm{/}{c}^2}\backslash gamma\; =\; 1/\backslash sqrt\{1-v^2/c^2\}$.

• So when they probe particles at higher and higher speeds, they see the energy curve rising, not the rest mass changing. That’s why they say “mass doesn’t increase.”

🔹 How ToE reframes this

• ToE says: what relativity calls “energy growth” is actually the entropic field regenerating inertia.

• In other words, the $\gamma \backslash gamma$ factor is not just a geometric bookkeeping device, but a real entropic cost that manifests as effective mass.

• Why don’t accelerators measure it as “mass”? Because their instruments are calibrated to treat rest mass as invariant. They interpret the extra resistance as “energy” rather than “mass.”

• From ToE’s standpoint, the accelerator is already measuring the effect — it just labels it differently. The rising energy curve is the entropic mass‑increase curve, but physics convention insists on calling it “energy” instead of “mass.”

🔹 The deeper philosophical split

• Relativity: geometry dictates the relations; mass is invariant; energy grows.

• ToE: entropy dictates the relations; effective inertia grows; geometry is the shadow of entropic dynamics.

• So the “why can’t accelerators measure it?” answer is: they do, but they interpret it as energy, not mass.

✅ So ToE posits: Accelerators already register the entropic increase — every time they need more and more energy to push a particle closer to $cc$. The difference is only in interpretation: relativity calls it “energy growth with invariant mass,” while ToE calls it “mass increase due to entropy.” The data are the same; the ontology is different.

ToE is not just re‑labeling relativity, and there are several places where ToE is genuinely new and potentially useful:

1. Ontological Shift: From Geometry to Entropy

• Relativity: takes spacetime geometry as fundamental.

• ToE: says geometry itself is emergent from entropy flow.

• Relevance: this reframes physics around a single substrate (entropy), which could unify thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, and relativity under one principle. That’s not just semantics — it’s a new starting point for unification.

2. Mechanism vs. Description

• Relativity: describes what happens (time dilates, lengths contract, energy grows) but doesn’t give a deeper cause beyond geometry.

• ToE: proposes a mechanism: entropy allocation.

  • More entropy → effective inertia (mass).

  • Less entropy left → slower temporal updating (time dilation).

  • Structural optimization → contraction.

• Relevance: this gives a physical “why” behind the Lorentz factor, not just a geometric “what.”

3. Absolute Substrate

• Relativity: motion is purely relative; there is no absolute check.

• ToE: entropy field is an absolute substrate that “knows” whether you are moving, even if two observers see themselves as mutually at rest.

• Relevance: this could resolve paradoxes (e.g. twin paradox, simultaneity puzzles) by grounding them in a physical field rather than pure coordinate transformations.

4. Bridge to Information Theory

• ToE naturally connects with Shannon entropy, Landauer’s principle, Rényi/Tsallis entropies, and information geometry.

• Relevance: this opens a path to unify physics with computation and information science — something relativity alone doesn’t do.

5. Predictive Potential

• If entropy is the substrate, then deviations from Lorentz symmetry might appear in extreme entropic regimes (black holes, early universe, quantum gravity).

• Relevance: ToE could suggest new measurable effects where relativity is silent — e.g. entropy‑driven corrections to gravitational lensing, horizon thermodynamics, or high‑energy scattering.

⚖️ The Value Proposition of ToE

• Relativity: indispensable, experimentally confirmed, but descriptive.

• ToE: proposes a deeper explanatory layer, with potential to unify physics and information, and possibly to predict new phenomena in regimes where relativity and quantum theory currently clash.

From Newton to Einstein, and from Einstein to ToE

The curious reader may ask: if relativity ruled out the ether and absolute motion, is ToE not bringing in the entropic field through the back door to say there is absolute motion? Newton says there is absolute motion and instantaneity, Einstein says there is no instantaneity and no absolute motion; now ToE is saying there is an absolute motion within the entropic field and no instantaneity. How do we reconcile this?

We shall frame our response exactly in terms of the historical lineage: Newton → Einstein → ToE. Let’s carefully reconcile them as follows:

1. Newton’s Ontology

• Absolute space and time: Newton posited a real, invisible stage (absolute space) against which all motion could be measured.

• Instantaneity: Time flowed uniformly everywhere, independent of observers.

• Absolute motion: A body could be said to move “truly” or “absolutely,” not just relative to others.

2. Einstein’s Ontology

• No absolute space or time: Space and time are fused into spacetime, and only relative motion matters.

• No instantaneity: Simultaneity is relative; there is no universal “now.”

• Geometry rules: Effects like time dilation and length contraction are geometric consequences of Lorentz invariance, not caused by a medium or substrate.

• Ether rejected: Einstein explicitly removed the need for a mechanical ether.

3. ToE’s Ontology

• Entropy as substrate: ToE introduces the entropic field, not as a mechanical ether, but as the generative principle of existence.

• No instantaneity: ToE agrees with Einstein that simultaneity is not universal. Time is emergent from entropy’s updating, not absolute.

• Absolute motion (qualified): ToE does reintroduce something like an “absolute check.” The entropic field itself “knows” whether a system is moving relative to the substrate of entropy, even if two observers see themselves as mutually at rest.

• Difference from Newton: This is not Newton’s rigid stage of absolute space and time. It is a dynamical, informational substrate that generates geometry itself.

• Difference from Einstein: Einstein’s geometry is descriptive; ToE’s entropy is causal. Geometry is the shadow; entropy is the substance.

4. How ToE Reconciles Newton and Einstein

Therefore, the Theory of Entropicity (ToE) is:

• Not a return to Newton: ToE does not bring back Newton’s absolute space and instantaneity. Time is still non‑instantaneous, and simultaneity is still relative.

• Not a contradiction of Einstein: ToE reproduces all Lorentz‑invariant effects (time dilation, length contraction, energy growth). It does not deny relativity’s predictions.

• A deeper layer: ToE says: relativity is the correct description of appearances, but the entropic field is the mechanism that enforces those appearances.

  • Relativity: “There is no absolute motion, only relative frames.”

  • ToE: “Relative frames are valid descriptions, but beneath them, the entropic field provides an absolute substrate that enforces the same Lorentz rules.”

⚖️ The Philosophical Resolution

• Newton: Absolute motion in absolute space.

• Einstein: No absolute motion, only geometry.

• ToE: Absolute motion relative to entropy, but no absolute simultaneity, Einstein's relativity and Newton's mechanics are preserved in the limit.

Hence, the Theory of Entropicity ( ToE) is not smuggling Newton’s ether back in; it is proposing a new kind of substrate — not mechanical, but informational/entropic. It preserves Einstein’s relativity of simultaneity, while adding a deeper ontology that explains why Lorentz invariance exists at all.

✅ In short: the Theory of Entropicity ( ToE) reconciles the tension between Newton and Einstein by saying:

• Einstein was right about the relativity of simultaneity.

• Newton was right that there is a deeper substrate.

• But that substrate is not absolute space and time — it is the entropic field, which generates spacetime itself.

Closing Notes on the Ontology and Epistemology of ToE

The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) asserts that entropy is not merely a statistical measure but the generative substrate of physical reality. Mass, time, and spatial structure are emergent expressions of the entropic field. As a particle’s velocity increases, the entropic field must allocate more of its resources to sustaining the particle’s inertial identity. This manifests as an effective increase in mass. At the same time, less entropic capacity remains available for temporal updating, which appears to observers as time dilation.

This raises a fundamental question for relativity: if energy is said to increase while inertial mass remains constant, what is the true source of that increase? Is velocity itself—understood as a geometric relation in spacetime—being implicitly treated as the cause of energy growth, time dilation, and length contraction? Relativity describes these effects as consequences of geometry, but it does not provide a deeper mechanism.

ToE offers that mechanism. It maintains that relative measurement is one thing, but the entropic field is the ultimate arbiter of motion and transformation. If a particle is accelerating, its entropic inertia must increase; this is not optional but a direct consequence of entropy’s allocation rules. Likewise, if two observers in relative motion each regard themselves as stationary, that does not mean they are truly at rest. The entropic field itself “knows” their absolute relation to the substrate of reality. If both approach the speed of light, the field enforces contraction and temporal slowdown—what relativity describes geometrically as length contraction and time dilation, ToE interprets as entropic squashing.

Thus, ToE insists that the relativistic effects cannot be explained away as mere coordinate transformations or geometric artifacts. Geometry is the shadow; entropy is the cause. The entropic field is the deeper reality that generates the Lorentz factor and enforces the universal speed limit. In this ontology, spacetime is not the foundation but the emergent geometry of entropy’s flow.

References

1. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). On the Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE): An Alternative Path toward Quantum Gravity and Unification of Physics. Link
2. Physics: HandWiki Master Index of Source Papers on Theory of Entropicity (ToE) (2025, September 9). HandWiki. Link
3. Obidi, John Onimisi. Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations of Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Encyclopedia. Link
4. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) Derives and Explains Mass Increase, Time Dilation and Length Contraction in Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (ToR): ToE Applies Logical Entropic Concepts and Principles to Verify Einstein’s Relativity. 
5. Wissner‑Gross, A. D., & Freer, C. E. (2013). Causal Entropic Forces. Physical Review Letters. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.168702
6. Amari, S. (2016). Information Geometry and Its Applications. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-55978-8
7. Jaynes, E. T. (1957). Information Theory and Statistical Mechanics. Physical Review, 106(4), 620. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.106.620
8. Nielsen, M. A., & Chuang, I. L. (2010). Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976667
9. Vidal, G. (2008). Class of Quantum Many‑Body States That Can Be Efficiently Simulated. Physical Review Letters, 101, 110501. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.110501
10. Amari, S., & Nagaoka, H. (2000). Methods of Information Geometry. AMS/Oxford. https://doi.org/10.1090/mmono/191
11. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). The Vuli‑Ndlela Integral in the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Link
12. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). The Obidi Action and the Foundation of the Entropy Field Equation. Link
13. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). The Master Entropic Equation (MEE). Link
14. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). Psych Entropy and the Entropy of the Mind. Link
15. Bianconi, G. (2009). Entropy of network ensembles. Physical Review E, 79, 036114. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.79.036114
16. Bianconi, G., & Barabási, A.-L. (2001). Competition and multiscaling in evolving networks. Europhysics Letters, 54(4), 436. https://doi.org/10.1209/epl/i2001-00260-6
17. Bianconi, G. (2025). Gravity from entropy. Physical Review D, 111(6), 066001. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.066001
18. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). The Theory of Entropicity (ToE): An Entropy‑Driven Derivation of Mercury’s Perihelion Precession Beyond Einstein’s Curved Spacetime General Relativity (GR). Cambridge University. Link
19. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). Einstein and Bohr Finally Reconciled on Quantum Theory: The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) as the Unifying Resolution to the Problem of Quantum Measurement and Wave Function Collapse. Cambridge University. Link
20. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). On the Discovery of New Laws of Conservation and Uncertainty, Probability and CPT‑Theorem Symmetry‑Breaking in the Standard Model of Particle Physics. Cambridge University. Link
21. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). A Critical Review of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE): Conceptual Innovations and Pathways toward Enhanced Mathematical Rigor. Cambridge University. Link
22. A Brief Critical Review of John Onimisi Obidi’s Recent Paper: On the Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). (2025). Link
23. The Theory of Entropicity (ToE) On the Geometry of Existence and the Curvature of Space‑Time. (2025). Link
24. On the Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE): An Alternative Path toward Quantum Gravity and the Unification of Physics. (2025). Link
25. The Discovery of the Entropic α‑Connection: How the Theory of Entropicity (ToE) Transformed Information Geometry into a Physical Law. (2025). Link
26. An Introduction to the Theory of Entropicity (ToE): On the Evolution of its Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations (Part I). (2025). Link
27. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). Theory of Entropicity (ToE): Historical and Philosophical Foundations. Encyclopedia. Link
28. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). A Simple Explanation of the Unifying Mathematical Architecture of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Link
29. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). On the Conceptual and Mathematical Foundations of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE): An Alternative Path toward Quantum Gravity and the Unification of Physics. Authorea. Link
30. Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). On the Conceptual and Mathematical Beauty of Obidi’s Theory of Entropicity (ToE): From Geometric Relativity to Geometric Entropicity. Link
31. Collected Works on the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Medium Publications. (2025). Link
32. Collected Works on the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Substack Publications. (2025). Link
33.  Obidi, John Onimisi (2025). Master Equation of the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/58596
34. The Cumulative Delay Principle (CDP) and Relativistic Kinematics in the Theory of Entropicity (ToE). the-cumulative-delay-principle-cdp-and-relativistic-kinematics-in-the-theory-of-entropicity-toe-a9b34cdf7095
35. HandWiki contributors, "Biography:John Onimisi Obidi," HandWiki, https://handwiki.org/wiki/index.php?title=Biography:John_Onimisi_Obidi&oldid=2743427 (accessed October 31, 2025).
36. Wikidata contributors, Biography: John Onimisi Obidi "Q136673971," Wikidata, https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q136673971&oldid=2423782576 (accessed October 31, 2025).
37. Google Scholar: ‪John Onimisi Obidi‬ - ‪Google Scholar‬
38. Cambridge University Open Engage (CoE): Collected Papers on the Theory of Entropicity (ToE)

#Relativity

#Physics

#Entropy

#Thermodynamics

#

Theory of Entropicity (ToE)