Log in
Register
Menu
Log in
Register
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Miscellaneous Sections
Tech Head - The Technology Section
Einstein's Alcove
What is reality really?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="2old4this" data-source="post: 18160" data-attributes="member: 174998"><p>More food for thought...</p><p></p><p>The attempts to create a unified "theory of everything" are premised on the assumption that gravity is at some fundamental level (perhaps at very high energies) the same kind of thing as the other forces (electromagnetic, strong nuclear, weak nuclear). The other forces arise from the exchange of elementary particles generically called bosons. The electromagnetic force, for example, is mitigated by the photon. </p><p></p><p>If gravity is to be viewed in the same way, then there must be a particle that is exchanged between two bodies experiencing gravitational attraction. This particle (the gravitational boson, or "quantum" of gravity) is nominally called the "graviton". No gravitons have ever been detected. However, as a quantumn particle, the graviton should exhibit wave/particle duality and give rise to gravitional waves. There are serious attempts being made to detect such waves.</p><p></p><p>But where I struggle is to reconcile this particle (or rather, wave/particle) view with the other view of gravity - that it is actually the warping of space-time by mass. This latter view is the cornerstone of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity - and indeed the reconciliation of that with quantum mechanics has still not been achieved. But the view of gravity as geometric curvature in the fabric of four-dimensional space-time has nevertheless been validated by observable phenomena such as gravitational lensing. </p><p></p><p>If there are two equally 'correct' and accurate views (a wave/particle or quantum-mechanical view, and a geometric or Einstinean/relativistic view) then the "real" nature of gravity must be something else, something "deeper". </p><p></p><p>To understand what that might be, consider this: if a theory of everything exists then it will amount to a quantisation of space-time geometry. What would that mean? Well it would mean that space-time is not analogue continuum, but is actually composed of discreet chunks.</p><p></p><p>Perhaps in finally understanding what gravity is and establishing a "theory of everything" we will have our first indication that reality may in fact be a digital construct - a simulation.</p><p></p><p>2old</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="2old4this, post: 18160, member: 174998"] More food for thought... The attempts to create a unified "theory of everything" are premised on the assumption that gravity is at some fundamental level (perhaps at very high energies) the same kind of thing as the other forces (electromagnetic, strong nuclear, weak nuclear). The other forces arise from the exchange of elementary particles generically called bosons. The electromagnetic force, for example, is mitigated by the photon. If gravity is to be viewed in the same way, then there must be a particle that is exchanged between two bodies experiencing gravitational attraction. This particle (the gravitational boson, or "quantum" of gravity) is nominally called the "graviton". No gravitons have ever been detected. However, as a quantumn particle, the graviton should exhibit wave/particle duality and give rise to gravitional waves. There are serious attempts being made to detect such waves. But where I struggle is to reconcile this particle (or rather, wave/particle) view with the other view of gravity - that it is actually the warping of space-time by mass. This latter view is the cornerstone of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity - and indeed the reconciliation of that with quantum mechanics has still not been achieved. But the view of gravity as geometric curvature in the fabric of four-dimensional space-time has nevertheless been validated by observable phenomena such as gravitational lensing. If there are two equally 'correct' and accurate views (a wave/particle or quantum-mechanical view, and a geometric or Einstinean/relativistic view) then the "real" nature of gravity must be something else, something "deeper". To understand what that might be, consider this: if a theory of everything exists then it will amount to a quantisation of space-time geometry. What would that mean? Well it would mean that space-time is not analogue continuum, but is actually composed of discreet chunks. Perhaps in finally understanding what gravity is and establishing a "theory of everything" we will have our first indication that reality may in fact be a digital construct - a simulation. 2old [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Miscellaneous Sections
Tech Head - The Technology Section
Einstein's Alcove
What is reality really?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top