0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

how does said force carrier get out of a blackhole,

Do you wish to restrict your thread to Quantum Gravity only ?

Your first wiki link points to the fundamental difference between relativity and quantum gravity. Both view space time differently. A clear understanding of what space is and how it works is required to understand gravity.

Both might be telling the truth but not the whole truth. As this paper describes Quantum theory and the structure of space-time https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.01012.pdf space time and gravity can be regarded emergent.

As a separate issue the theoretical Graviton has never been detected but is fundamental to many of the approaches looking at quantum gravity, this theoretical virtual particle/force carrier might not exist. Avoiding maths, how does said force carrier get out of a blackhole, it cant unless it behaves like hawking radiation, with entangled pairs. In which case is it a graviton or just a random quantum fluctuation in space, with no specific properties, other than it is entangled to its partner particle momentarily.

That sounds good, buy may not be so easy. There is no generally accepted clear understanding of what space is, and the solution to quantum gravity will have its own description of what space is, just like the main theories have their own sets of postulates and axioms. Not everyone will agree on the definition of space, but it will have to be addressed.

It will take readers a lot of time and effort to absorb that link. That is why I made the following comment in the OP: “But let’s consider the thread open to both a general discussion on the topic, and to technical content as long as they are accompanied by comments to explain them in terms a layman can hope to understand.” Can you boil your link down to a brief executive summary?

There's a thread, somewhere, about gravity "escaping" from a BH.

Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 31/08/2018 12:37:28That sounds good, buy may not be so easy. There is no generally accepted clear understanding of what space is, and the solution to quantum gravity will have its own description of what space is, just like the main theories have their own sets of postulates and axioms. Not everyone will agree on the definition of space, but it will have to be addressed.How about this as a starting point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondence

It will take readers a lot of time and effort to absorb that link. That is why I made the following comment in the OP: “But let’s consider the thread open to both a general discussion on the topic, and to technical content as long as they are accompanied by comments to explain them in terms a layman can hope to understand.” Can you boil your link down to a brief executive summary?QuoteItems discussed in the first wiki link are expanded on and discussed in the paper. It explains both quantum theory, and space-time, are an emergent phenomena, all the current theories attempting to explain gravity are only partly correct, but all have merit. A new direction may be required to explain gravity.

Items discussed in the first wiki link are expanded on and discussed in the paper. It explains both quantum theory, and space-time, are an emergent phenomena, all the current theories attempting to explain gravity are only partly correct, but all have merit. A new direction may be required to explain gravity.

Theories originating in string theory such as the holographic universe and my favourite at the moment Verlindes emergent/entropic gravity allow all those intriguing things such as entanglement/wormholes/extra dimensions and dont need dark matter to explain the universe. Verlindes approach gives a theoretical basis for MOND theory which is basically curve fit developed a few years ago to explain the movement of the outer parts of galaxies without introducing arbitrary amounts of dark matter.

How about this as a starting point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondenceThat seems to be appropriate material

I have given my thoughts on related topics like the meaning of nothingness

Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 31/08/2018 13:27:43How about this as a starting point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT_correspondenceThat seems to be appropriate materialYou might want to look at de sitter space first, not all theories need anti de sitter space and are simpler without it

Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 31/08/2018 13:27:43I have given my thoughts on related topics like the meaning of nothingnessinteresting!!!

As far as I know 'renormalization' means you putting the cutoffs where you find it appropriate, looking at statistics and practicality of use. That means that you impose 'realistic standards' on the mathematics you you chose to work with, ignoring results that doesn't fit with what you would expect.=

And I have to admit that I'm still partial to Einsteins description in where 'gravity' isn't a 'force'. Think of being in a geodesic for seeing that way of looking at it.

Well, quantum level objects are a tricky thing to define. A electron superimposed f.ex,(superpositions) or take the experiment in where they actually 'photographed' electrons proving them to 'exist' Seems to me that most of the things that defines us macroscopically is a direct result of time passing, It's the outcome that defines us, and the experiment. You can turn it around and state that the experiment will define the outcome too. So there are consistent laws but? What actually goes on down there is another question.=And no, unless you're using decoherence to define it quantum objects are what we all are made of, so we all follow 'geodesics' no matter what scale we define it from. Using decoherence you might be able to formulate it differently though.Actually, that is a preoccupation of mind for me, because to me decoherence is not only about the scale(s) of a universe. To me it question dimensions.

“Quantum decoherence is the loss of quantum coherence. In quantum mechanics, particles such as electrons are described by a wavefunction, a mathematical description of the quantum state of a system; the probabilistic nature of the wavefunction gives rise to various quantum effects. As long as there exists a definite phase relation between different states, the system is said to be coherent. This coherence is a fundamental property of quantum mechanics, and is necessary for the functioning of quantum computers. However, when a quantum system is not perfectly isolated, but in contact with its surroundings, coherence decays with time, a process called quantum decoherence. As a result of this process, the relevant quantum behaviour is lost.Decoherence was first introduced in 1970 by the German physicist H. Dieter Zeh[1] and has been a subject of active research since the 1980s.[2] Decoherence has been developed into a complete framework which is said to solve the measurement problem.[3]Decoherence can be viewed as the loss of information from a system into the environment (often modeled as a heat bath),[4] since every system is loosely coupled with the energetic state of its surroundings. Viewed in isolation, the system's dynamics are non-unitary (although the combined system plus environment evolves in a unitary fashion).[5] Thus the dynamics of the system alone are irreversible. As with any coupling, entanglements are generated between the system and environment. These have the effect of sharing quantum information with—or transferring it to—the surroundings.Decoherence has been used to understand the collapse of the wavefunction in quantum mechanics. Decoherence does not generate actual wave function collapse. It only provides an explanation for the observation of wave function collapse, as the quantum nature of the system "leaks" into the environment. That is, components of the wavefunction are decoupled from a coherent system, and acquire phases from their immediate surroundings. A total superposition of the global or universal wavefunction still exists (and remains coherent at the global level), but its ultimate fate remains an interpretational issue. Specifically, decoherence does not attempt to explain the measurement problem. Rather, decoherence provides an explanation for the transition of the system to a mixture of states that seem to correspond to those states observers perceive. Moreover, our observation tells us that this mixture looks like a proper quantum ensemble in a measurement situation, as we observe that measurements lead to the "realization" of precisely one state in the "ensemble".Decoherence represents a challenge for the practical realization of quantum computers, since such machines are expected to rely heavily on the undisturbed evolution of quantum coherences. Simply put, they require that coherent states be preserved and that decoherence is managed, in order to actually perform quantum computation.”

For renormalization you need statistical mechanics. Here is one of Leonard Susskind's lectures.(See the YouTube link in his post above)