0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
However, we know that a particle has higher energy when the associated wavelength is smaller. ......, therefore higher wavelength apear only if there is relative motion between the observer and the particle.
We are dealing now with effects on quantum fields, which GR cannot handle,
Quote from: nilak on 12/04/2018 13:09:41However, we know that a particle has higher energy when the associated wavelength is smaller. ......, therefore higher wavelength apear only if there is relative motion between the observer and the particle.Relative motion is not necessary.Quote from: nilak on 12/04/2018 13:09:41 We are dealing now with effects on quantum fields, which GR cannot handle, I don’t understand what you are saying here. GR can handle quantum fields, but the 2 work at different scales. You wouldn’t use a micrometer to measure a football field.
Why relative motion is not necessary?
Here is a different point of view, with more details:https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/387/a-list-of-inconveniences-between-quantum-mechanics-and-general-relativity
From the start I'd like to clarify that space and a medium are different things. I think you either use some rules of spacetime or a medium in which the light and matter waves travel. Not sure if you can call what you have described space anymore. It still confuses me as the GR spacetime actually is like a medium.In this case the medium can occupy a volume of space. This space can be euclidean or you can even use the Minkowsky spacetime but I suppose an euclidean spacetime would be the right option as it would be just for reference. Wether this medium is static or like a fluid is another question that would need to be answered. If you want to be closer to GR, a dynamic medium would be preferable. In this case the medium would react to let's say the intensity of the field. However, we know that a particle has higher energy when the associated wavelength is smaller. But all particles have invariant rest mass, therefore higher wavelength apear only if there is relative motion between the observer and the particle. We need some math to see if this works, and it is quite complicated from my point of view. Anyway, gravity would be the effect on this fluid. We are dealing now with effects on quantum fields, which GR cannot handle, so it would be required completely new equations to work with these.If on the other hand the medium is static, gravity could be mediated by quantum particles or just continuous effect between fields.For now we have a good classical theory for gravity that we can't use because at a fundamental level there is quantum physics, and another problem is we don't have physical interpretation for Quantum physics either.
Quote from: nilak on 13/04/2018 13:43:25Why relative motion is not necessary? I think you are forgetting gravitational effects. I know you know, because we’ve discussed before.Quote from: nilak on 13/04/2018 13:43:25Here is a different point of view, with more details:https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/387/a-list-of-inconveniences-between-quantum-mechanics-and-general-relativityAs it says in the link “None of this is really a contradiction between general relativity and quantum mechanics. ”
I understand Relativity assumes space to be unchanging volume.
It includes the cosmological constant (Dark Energy) to explain away the expansion of space.
It does not explain the mechanism behind the apparent expansion(dark energy) and contraction(gravity) of space.
Can space 1) be considered a super fluid, by most theories,2) exist without quantum fluctuations. 3) be multidimensional if non local effects can not be explained in any other way. 4) allow both real and virtual particles to exist in it. 5) expand due to dark energy( possibly caused by virtual particles/quantum fluctuations)6) contract due mass and gravity( possibly due to the absorption of quantum fluctuations/gravitons)
Edit I found this link indicating non locality is a fact, but it may be able to be explained away via a wave function, I think that is what its conclusion was https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1402/1402.4764.pdf
Quote from: disinterested on 14/04/2018 14:08:29.Can space 1) be considered a super fluid, by most theories,2) exist without quantum fluctuations. 3) be multidimensional if non local effects can not be explained in any other way. 4) allow both real and virtual particles to exist in it. 5) expand due to dark energy( possibly caused by virtual particles/quantum fluctuations)6) contract due mass and gravity( possibly due to the absorption of quantum fluctuations/gravitons)
.Can space 1) be considered a super fluid, by most theories,2) exist without quantum fluctuations. 3) be multidimensional if non local effects can not be explained in any other way. 4) allow both real and virtual particles to exist in it. 5) expand due to dark energy( possibly caused by virtual particles/quantum fluctuations)6) contract due mass and gravity( possibly due to the absorption of quantum fluctuations/gravitons)
3) be multidimensional if non local effects can not be explained in any other way. - depends what you mean by “can”. Do you mean “is” if no other known explanation exists? Not a logical conclusion.
3. You should define what other dimensions you want, space, time, how many and how they work. But normally, because of energy conservation you should not need another dimension as it would allow energy to escape.
1) be considered a super fluid, by most theories, - most theories just ignore this. As I said in @jeffreyH thread on inertia, space doesn’t offer any resistance to mass. Problem is how to detect superfluid, how would we know if there were permanent eddies? Best you can say is behaves like it when considersd in specific ways.
Does frame dragging as predicted by relativity not demonstrate a fluid effect. Also mass can not be accelerated to light speed, is this not a demonstration of space presenting resistance.
What is space? It expands and contracts (possibly due to gravitons, quantum fluctuations, dark energy).
What would be interesting would be to look at superfluid phenomena and see what might be expected eg if a superfluid is placed in a rotating container instead of rotating uniformly with the container, the rotating state consists of quantized vortices - are there similar effects that might be noticable?
There's no evidence space itself has any malleable properties.
I might ask you what a quantum fluctuation or virtual particle is, how do they manifest themselves in space. All things and forces are contained within space, if you zoom into a volume of space it is full of quantum fluctuations without which space as we understand it would not exist. Space is full of quantum fluctuations it is not empty nothingness. No virtual particles = no space = no gravity= nothing. Nothing has no dimensions it is nothing.
I might ask you what a quantum fluctuation or virtual particle is, how do they manifest themselves in space.
Quote from: disinterested on 15/04/2018 13:42:14I might ask you what a quantum fluctuation or virtual particle is, how do they manifest themselves in space.I think these particles may represent dimensional collapse.