So in summary, if right, it means that spacetime is not as predictable as we thought.
New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
31–40 of 203 posts
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Aren't there always some fraction of atoms or molecules with sufficiently high energy to escape the object? Can someone help me understand this? I thought that things were supposed to be stable given the elements used for le grand k. That they don't decay on their own and it would have to be another mechanism to explain the divergence? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Prototype_of_the...
In a system of particles, due to random Brownian motion and the nature of Gaussian energy distributions, a small number of particles occasionally gain significantly higher energy than average through statistical fluctuations. Maybe enough to escape the binding energy of le grand k. However I would think this is a very very small effect in platinum.
Sure, radioactivity.
But, Le grand K is made of naturally occurring platinum of which most of the isotopes are observationally stable[0] and the one isotope that isn't has a half-life of 6.5×10^11 and only makes up 0.012% [1].
So yeah I don't buy the unstable explanation to even begin to show the divergence, let alone "weight gain".
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_nuclide#Still-unobserve...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_platinum
[Edit] Wait are you describing evaporation?
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#33The article mentions the 5000:1 odds bet, but reading the text of the bet itself is hilarious:
>>> Whereas Carlo Rovelli and Geoff Penington firmly believe that gravity is better described by a quantum theory.
>>> And whereas Jonathan Oppenheim is more sympathetic to other possibilities (i.e. doesn’t have a clue) ...
[1] - https://www.ucl.ac.uk/oppenheim/pub/quantum_vs_classical_bet...
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#34This is a question I've been asking myself (probably due to a lack of understanding and knowledge) and this theory seems to hint at something similar: why do we assume spacetime to be homogenous in its nature? Here they seem to say that on some quantum level spacetime could vary drastically. Couldn't then dark matter be explained by some variations on a large scale? Like giant "wrinkles" in spacetime? They would then…
I've had the same question and I don't have the answer, but what you're asking about might be referred to as the cosmological principle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_principle
Seems like so far our observations are that the universe is pretty homogeneous. Cosmological principle being the default position, my best understanding is that it's just a lack of evidence otherwise:
> The End of Greatness is an observational scale discovered at roughly 100 Mpc (roughly 300 million light-years) where the lumpiness seen in the large-scale structure of the universe is homogenized and isotropized in accordance with the Cosmological Principle. At this scale, no pseudo-random fractalness is apparent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#End_of_Gre...
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#35I was really hoping to find concrete details of what the experiment that they proposed to validate or refute their theory is. I hope it's something achievable, or at least not ridiculously far from what we can currently measure
The experiments are described in the second paper, at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-43348-2
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that you, a random internet guy, knows this makes me believe that the world's top experts on measuring this exact thing probably thought of it, and if there is a mysterious divergence this probably doesn't account for it.
I've heard of an appeal to authority, but an appeal to ignorance is new. OPs question is not ridiculous, nor does he suggest it to counter the "mysterious" claims
Not new, Efficient Markets Hypothesis is like this. "I haven't heard of a way to make money from trading so there isn't one" is my caricature of it.
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#37This is a question I've been asking myself (probably due to a lack of understanding and knowledge) and this theory seems to hint at something similar: why do we assume spacetime to be homogenous in its nature? Here they seem to say that on some quantum level spacetime could vary drastically. Couldn't then dark matter be explained by some variations on a large scale? Like giant "wrinkles" in spacetime? They would then…
If there is some reason over here isn’t the same as over there then there will be a mechanism as to why that is the case and you will want an explanation.
You want your physics to apply everywhere and that’s why you start with the assumption that the same laws, constants, etc apply everywhere.
There’s no “ope stuff is just different over there” in physics, you look for those inconsistencies and then you try to explain them.
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a system of particles, due to random Brownian motion and the nature of Gaussian energy distributions, a small number of particles occasionally gain significantly higher energy than average through statistical fluctuations. Maybe enough to escape the binding energy of le grand k. However I would think this is a very very small effect in platinum.
Sure, radioactivity. But, Le grand K is made of naturally occurring platinum of which most of the isotopes are observationally stable[0] and the one isotope that isn't has a half-life of 6.5×10^11 and only makes up 0.012% [1]. So yeah I don't buy the unstable explanation to even begin to show the divergence, let alone "weight gain". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_nuclide#Still-unobserve... [1] https://en.wi…
Edit: yes
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a system of particles, due to random Brownian motion and the nature of Gaussian energy distributions, a small number of particles occasionally gain significantly higher energy than average through statistical fluctuations. Maybe enough to escape the binding energy of le grand k. However I would think this is a very very small effect in platinum.
Sure, radioactivity. But, Le grand K is made of naturally occurring platinum of which most of the isotopes are observationally stable[0] and the one isotope that isn't has a half-life of 6.5×10^11 and only makes up 0.012% [1]. So yeah I don't buy the unstable explanation to even begin to show the divergence, let alone "weight gain". [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stable_nuclide#Still-unobserve... [1] https://en.wi…
Yes, he's describing evaporation. Here's a thread about it, basically the answer is "we don't know" https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/77130/why-does-p...
Re: New theory claims to unite Einstein's gravity with quantum mechanics
#40What awful AI-generated illustrations.
Anyway, is there any justification for treating spacetime as a smooth manifold, except for mathematical tractability?