Live data from Hacker News

Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

nytimes.com

361–370 of 502 posts

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying cars man! Think of the flying cars! And maybe real hover boards

First we need to find out how to create repulsion. Right now I'm pretty sure a graviton generator would just be a novelty device that weighs more than what it's mass would lead you to think it weighs. Maybe we could make orbital graviton beam generator that could literally suck an object off the face of the Earth.

> I'm pretty sure a graviton generator would just be a novelty device that weighs more than what it's mass would lead you to think it weighs

Which would make space travel a lot easier - no more worrying about bone density loss!

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#362
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is this where the translation from GR -> QM breaks down? Sort of, to get a graviton you introduce perturbations on a background metric. (Basically small wiggles of spacetime around an 'average.') You don't do anything like that when you solve the Einstein equations. Consequently, the background spacetime ( that is, the black hole) is not really made of gravitons. (At least in some sense.)

So in GR the metric itself is warping, which is a problem if you need a background reference/stable metric to define your graviton field? Is that close? Anyway thanks.

Yes, pretty close.

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#363
post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, we'll finally be able to hear what god said at the start of the universe?

This is a beautiful premise for a mind bending book.

I'm sure He either said "let there be light" or "gee, that's funny...."

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flying cars man! Think of the flying cars! And maybe real hover boards

First we need to find out how to create repulsion. Right now I'm pretty sure a graviton generator would just be a novelty device that weighs more than what it's mass would lead you to think it weighs. Maybe we could make orbital graviton beam generator that could literally suck an object off the face of the Earth.

> a novelty device that weighs more than what it's mass would lead you to think it weighs

This is an interesting concept. As far as I'm aware, we have ways of measuring weight, but no way of measuring mass. How would you know whether something weighed more than it "should", based on its "mass"?

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#365

This made me wonder how far we are from being able to create and detect gravitons. The Wikipedia page on gravitons [0] addresses this question: Unambiguous detection of individual gravitons, though not prohibited by any fundamental law, is impossible with any physically reasonable detector. The reason is the extremely low cross section for the interaction of gravitons with matter. For example, a detector with the mas…

If gravitons have mass, then the universe is too strange to exist. Gravity is an interaction that defines the presence of matter (see dark matter). For the object that transmits that force between masses to itself have mass ... how can a black hole then project gravity? Imho whatever is carrying gravity between masses cannot itself have a mass.

> Imho whatever is carrying gravity between masses cannot itself have a mass.

Forget gravitons, this already exists in pure general relativity. Spacetime is curved around a massive object, and that curvature contains energy. That's just another word for mass, so the curvature itself exerts gravity. This creates more curvature (...etc etc). This is one of the reasons as to why Einstein's equations are nonlinear.

Note that the concept of having mass is separate from the gravity force. Interaction with the Higgs field gives rise to mass, whereas gravitons are the force carrying particle for gravity.

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Force carrying particles in general don't have mass. Except that some of them seem to do, which was rather puzzling for some time, but was solved using the Higgs mechanism. I can't think of an obvious reason the Higgs mechanism wouldn't work for gravitons, but I could be mistaken, it's not exactly the most intuitive area of physics. Also, keep in mind that the strong force transmits the force between colour charges w…

If the massive gravitron was leaving a black hole it would be slowed by the black hole's gravity. (1) We should see this as some inconsistency in how gravity scales with the mass of a black hole. The larger ones would have proportionately greater 'drag' on leaving gravitrons, pulling more in. (2) If they are massive, and therefore subject to slowing, shouldn't gravity waves leaving a black hole be subject to some sor…

> We should see this as some inconsistency in how gravity scales with the mass of a black hole.

This inconsistency is a part of general relativity (even though gravitons themselves aren't). A black hole does not follow the GM/r^2 gravity law.

> If they are massive, and therefore subject to slowing, shouldn't gravity waves leaving a black hole be subject to some sort of doppler effect? Should we be looking for red/blueshifts in these waves?

Yes, there is a doppler effect.

> If gravitrons have mass and are subject to gravity, what brings that gravity? What sub-gravitron particle regulates gravity going in/to/out of the gravitron? This would require a new set of particles be created by non-gravitron massive objects (ie black holes) alongside the gravitrons. Like I said, too strange to exist.

Gravitons. Every now and then a pair of gravitons may exchange more gravitons (these are also virtual particles, so it's fine). This is why Feynman diagrams exist, so that you can not only calculate the interaction between two particles through a graviton, but also calculate the contribution of the lower-probability situations where more gravitons magically appear to transmit gravity between gravitons.

This is nothing new. Gluons (the carrier for the color/strong force) do basically the same thing. They are also bound by the force they carry, and thus gluons can interact with each other with more gluons.

Because these are virtual particles and only exist as a probability, this doesn't lead to infinite recursion. The secondary gravitons are improbable, and the tertiary gravitons more so, and so on, and the final series converges.

Re: Physicists Detect Gravitational Waves, Proving Einstein Right

#370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>(1) We should see this as some inconsistency in how gravity scales with the mass of a black hole. The larger ones would have proportionately greater 'drag' on leaving gravitrons. Perhaps, no clue how a quantum mechanical gravity would interact with a black hole. >(2) If they are massive, and therefore subject to slowing, shouldn't gravity waves leaving a black hole be subject to some sort of doppler effect? Should w…

If they interact with each other, then wouldn't any "wave" collapse? The particles leave the event in a smooth wave. Then they run into other waves, or each other, or just the background gravity fields. This perturbation should cause them to clump together. So in short order the smooth wave would become large blobs of gravitrons more akin to raindrops than waves. And without anything holding them apart, might not som…

It's a converging series; instead of getting a clumping you may get a slight mass increase. These new gravitons that modulate gravity between existing gravitons are not 100% there, so they do not contribute that much.
Post reply on HN