Quote Originally Posted by mojo
If the model could recreate the observed consequences of Einstein's description of gravity, then I'd be more interested.

They say it's "compatible" with GR, but that's not the same as actually deriving the field equations.

I wasn't really comfortable with the phrase either "entropic force", not so much when it comes to certain "entropic" forces but where a stretched elastic band is concerned (an example they cite) that's standard EM and/or weak/strong force. No need to invoke a "new" force.

Centrifugal force might not be a "real" force but it certainly has real effects. With that in mind, clearly we need a term for this "force", it's just whether "force" is the right word to describe it. And we already caveat this "force" by saying it's an inertial force (a much better term for a fictitious force), which gravity can also be described as. That's a force that emerges only in non-inertial frames of reference... in an inertial frame of reference it's non-existent. So the problem isn't the word "centrifugal", it's "force".