Reconciling General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, attempt 1

James Snover

The Ill-Advised Physics Amplification Co
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
8,863
Location
Cypress
Physics thought of the day: been reading up on Loop Quantum Gravity, string theory, etc, in an attempt to unite General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.

String theory gives literally endless solutions to the problem. Apart from deciding on which one is true for our universe, every flavor of it requires more than the four dimensions with which we are all intuitively familiar: Up/down, backwards/forwards, front/back, and time. In fact, every example of string theory absolutely must have the extra dimensions or it just doesn't work. They say things like, these dimensions are so small, that maybe they can't be perceived.

Ok.

Guth's inflationary theory says that in the very first infinitesimal fractions of the universe's existence, it inflated by huge orders of magnitude faster than the speed of light. So quickly that probably much of the universe remains far beyond what we can observe because the light from those areas has not had time to reach us.

Lately Guth and others have been wondering if all of the universe expanded at the same rate, and if it did, could it be that some parts of which we can never be aware operate on completely different physical laws.

And some of the quantum mechanics boys are now saying that spacetime itself is quantized. That space is not continuous, but exists as discrete blocks of "spacetime," separated by ... we don't know what, but not spacetime! But the chunks are so small, that like light, we can't see individual photons pouring out of a flashlight, we just see a steady, continuous, beam of light.

So, ok:

What if Guth is right about inflation, and right about not all of it expanding at the same rate? What if the string theory boys are right, and there are many more than the ordinary four dimensions we experience?

So what happened was: when the universe expanded from its initial infinitesimally small state, only the three dimensions of length, width and height expanded; and time, and the other four or five or more dimensions DID NOT EXPAND? They stayed the same infinitesimal size of the initial universe, far below the Planck length (we can talk about that, later). They're still there, evenly distributed throughout the universe, doing whatever it was they did (the path way for gluons? for gravity? to travel between "chunks" of spacetime? The pathways through which time flows?")

Tell you what. Y'all don't worry about it. I'm gonna be up all night. I'll think about it.
 

L8APEX

*Turbo Not to Scale
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
2,746
Location
The Air Capitol
I was thinking that string theory was replaced by "M" or membrane theory?
But the only certain in quantum physics is it seems to constantly change.
 

James Snover

The Ill-Advised Physics Amplification Co
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
8,863
Location
Cypress
I was thinking that string theory was replaced by "M" or membrane theory?
But the only certain in quantum physics is it seems to constantly change.
From what I have read so far, brane theory has been incorporated into loop quantum gravity; and both under the umbrella of string theory. Currently string theory's problem is that how the un-inflated dimensions interact, and how many of them there are, gets you a completely different universe. No one yet knows if we're in a subset of the set of all universes, or if the theory is still completely out to lunch. But like you said, QM changes constantly.
 

milas

Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
80
Location
US
Doesn't gravity affect spacetime in relativity, and thus acts as a fifth dimension in addition to the standard 4?

How does dark matter play into relativity with respect to time and gravity, would that make a potential 6th dimension that associates mass with spacetime and gravity?

Interesting topic, but not sure enough information is available "today" to understand it?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

ShelbyGT5HUN

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
4,702
Location
USA
Planck Length Visualized:

Planck Length = 1.6 E-35 m

From Wikipedia (their math is close enough for this example)...

The size of the Planck length can be visualized as follows: if a particle or dot about 0.1mm (about the size of this period ".") in size (which is at or near the smallest the unaided human eye can see) were magnified in size to be as large as the observable universe, then inside that universe-sized "dot", the Planck length would be roughly the size of an actual 0.1mm dot
 
Last edited:

James Snover

The Ill-Advised Physics Amplification Co
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
8,863
Location
Cypress
Doesn't gravity affect spacetime in relativity, and thus acts as a fifth dimension in addition to the standard 4?

How does dark matter play into relativity with respect to time and gravity, would that make a potential 6th dimension that associates mass with spacetime and gravity?

Interesting topic, but not sure enough information is available "today" to understand it?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
You are correct: gravity does affect spacetime. General Relativity basically says gravity, space and time are one and the same because gravity is just curved spacetime. The presence of mass/energy is what curves the spacetime. Therefore, according to General Relativity, gravity is not a true force, just a byproduct of the presence of mass/energy. So in classical physics (non quantum mechanical physics) we consider four dimensions (length, height, width and time) because gravity is, basically, already in it, it is it.

And there is the problem: in classical physics (General Relativity), when you consider where anything is going, you have to consider that spacetime itself is curved, and will affect where anything goes. Spacetime is a dynamic thing that cannot be ignored. Leave gravity out of your equations, you get wrong answers.

In quantum mechanics, gravity is ignored, and spacetime is seen to be static, a stage on which things happen, but that does not itself affect what happens. Try and consider gravity in your equations, you get disastrously, impossibly, wrong answers.

Ironically, Einstein created the Theory of Special and General Relativity, and made huge contributions to quantum mechanics. He may not have created all of quantum mechanical theory but he was one of the cornerstone figures in it. He spent the rest of his life trying to reconcile GR and QM and couldn't do it. And, he hated QM, on a personal level. Kept trying to wreck it, and instead kept confirming basic parts of it. It bugged him, but he followed it to see where it would go.
 

BlckBox04

I am the liquor
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
8,548
Location
NJ
I couldn't decide if I wanted chicken or steak for dinner. This gave me better insight on the decision.
 

BigPoppa

Hope you enjoy the show
Established Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
2,253
Location
Your mom
Guth may be right that the expansion was not linear, but most likely due to the fact that spacetime expanded faster than light. I've theorized that the latest studies indicating that the expansion rate of the universe increasing is most likely always been increasing and it is a result of spacetime expanding resulting in less compression of spacetime as it spreads out into literal void parts of the universe.
 

BigPoppa

Hope you enjoy the show
Established Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
2,253
Location
Your mom
But the only problem I have with the theory is that it supports infinite universe theory and I tend to believe that the universe is finite.

My reasoning is simply due to the fact that spacetime would have to be contained to be compressed. If it was infinite, it couldn't be compressed.

Of course, if the compression was faster than the expansion, then that disproves that theory and the universe could be infinite.
 

James Snover

The Ill-Advised Physics Amplification Co
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
8,863
Location
Cypress
But the only problem I have with the theory is that it supports infinite universe theory and I tend to believe that the universe is finite.

My reasoning is simply due to the fact that spacetime would have to be contained to be compressed. If it was infinite, it couldn't be compressed.

Of course, if the compression was faster than the expansion, then that disproves that theory and the universe could be infinite.
Brings up the idea of a very interesting boundary layer where the speed of light and the initial rate of expansion overlapped. What do you think the consequences of that could have been? Don't ask me, because your post just now made me think of it.
 

derklug

Seriously? No, never.
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
4,442
Location
Mi
At the moment of the Big Bang, they have some waveforms traveling faster than light. So wouldn't they be going back in time and when they slowed down and started coalescing into matter, they would be billions of miles away when the Bang went off? Bear with me, my understanding of physics is just enough to know that a wife swinging a cast iron skillet will get enough angular momentum to do some serious damage.
 

BigPoppa

Hope you enjoy the show
Established Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
2,253
Location
Your mom
Brings up the idea of a very interesting boundary layer where the speed of light and the initial rate of expansion overlapped. What do you think the consequences of that could have been? Don't ask me, because your post just now made me think of it.
My best guess would be that light, itself, would not have been able to travel beyond the edge of spacetime since we know that light follows the curvature of distortions in spacetime when it is compressed. Given that, it isn't improbable to think that light can only propagate within the limits of spacetime. If that is true, that means if there are voids in the universe where spacetime has not expanded into, there is absolute darkness.

Now enters the quantum effect. Does that mean quantum particles can propagate outside the spacetime field (or aether as Einstein liked to call it)? if so, then it is possible the possible void in the universe may be filled with quantum particles. If that is the case, not to mention the data supporting that the higgs boson actually exists, does that mean spacetime is comprised of higgs bosons itself or some other quantum particle? The fact that spacetime can be compressed and warped, does tend to support the possibility that spacetime consists of some sort of matter.
 

James Snover

The Ill-Advised Physics Amplification Co
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
8,863
Location
Cypress
At the moment of the Big Bang, they have some waveforms traveling faster than light. So wouldn't they be going back in time and when they slowed down and started coalescing into matter, they would be billions of miles away when the Bang went off? Bear with me, my understanding of physics is just enough to know that a wife swinging a cast iron skillet will get enough angular momentum to do some serious damage.
Pretty much, you are right. Just a few important points:

It's not the waveforms travelling faster than light, rather it is the space in which the waveforms are oscillating that is traveling faster than light. A technical distinction, but an important one. The net result of it is, if you had been present at the birth of the universe to see it, what you would see is sudden huge patches of darkness all around you. If inflation was real, then we really don't know how big the universe actually is, only the portion around us, 13-odd billion lightyears in any direction, have had a chance to reach us. Most of the universe may in fact be so far away that the light will never have time to reach us before the universe ends. We don't yet know how to prove or disprove this. But since Inflationary theory has a lot of supporting evidence, something like it probably happened, so ... it may be we are only seeing the least little bit of the entire universe, inside our own lightspeed event horizon. We don't know how big the universe may actually be. We don't know that the initial FTL expansion ever stopped. And if it hasn't, that's something we won't ever be able to know!

Crazy universe. Someone ought to sell tickets.
 

03Sssnake

TK-421
Established Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2002
Messages
41,006
Location
not at my post...
nerdss.gif
 

milas

Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
80
Location
US
You are correct: gravity does affect spacetime. General Relativity basically says gravity, space and time are one and the same because gravity is just curved spacetime. The presence of mass/energy is what curves the spacetime. Therefore, according to General Relativity, gravity is not a true force, just a byproduct of the presence of mass/energy. So in classical physics (non quantum mechanical physics) we consider four dimensions (length, height, width and time) because gravity is, basically, already in it, it is it.

And there is the problem: in classical physics (General Relativity), when you consider where anything is going, you have to consider that spacetime itself is curved, and will affect where anything goes. Spacetime is a dynamic thing that cannot be ignored. Leave gravity out of your equations, you get wrong answers.

In quantum mechanics, gravity is ignored, and spacetime is seen to be static, a stage on which things happen, but that does not itself affect what happens. Try and consider gravity in your equations, you get disastrously, impossibly, wrong answers.

Ironically, Einstein created the Theory of Special and General Relativity, and made huge contributions to quantum mechanics. He may not have created all of quantum mechanical theory but he was one of the cornerstone figures in it. He spent the rest of his life trying to reconcile GR and QM and couldn't do it. And, he hated QM, on a personal level. Kept trying to wreck it, and instead kept confirming basic parts of it. It bugged him, but he followed it to see where it would go.
That's the point, between general relativity and grand unifying theory is that he couldn't close the loop, which led to more quantum mechanics (kind of). It seems odd to ignore gravity and mass when it is so integral to so much of spacetime.

If we do find ways of harnessing mass (dark matter) to generate and bend gravity with purpose, which in turn influences spacetime, you'd think that would be ways to do things like create wormholes and slow/speed time. Seems like we'd be working with our hands tied behind our backs without considering those, despite the havoc it wreaks on the known equations?

Fun to theorize, harder to make/do...

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top