Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

quantamagazine.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 167 posts

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#111

Post by Aardwolf »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #47
Aardwolf wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The model of non-self-interacting gravity is a particle we call a "graviton," and it probably describes reality very well when the gravitation involved is so weak that its self-interaction is undetectable. Can you please elaborate, the first part of the sentence says graviton is for non-self-interacting gravity, the second part of the sentence says graviton is for self-interacting (if 'its' in 'its self-interaction…

> Can you please elaborate, the first part of the sentence says graviton is for non-self-interacting gravity, the second part of the sentence says graviton is for self-interacting (if 'its' in 'its self-interaction' refers to the graviton). The point is, we know gravitation does self-interact. But our best model, the graviton, doesn't model self-interaction. So the model is probably accurate in regimes where you'd ex…

Would self-interaction mean something like:

just like the massless photon, the massless graviton would be bent by the gravity of black holes... hence self interaction?

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#112

Post by elashri »

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #57

I choked on this part: > The discussion recalls a messy, largely forgotten episode from the dawn of the quantum era. In 1905, Einstein interpreted experimental data to mean that light is “quantized,” coming in discrete particles now called photons. Others, including Niels Bohr and Max Planck, thought that the classical, wave nature of light might still be saved. [...] Most physicists presume that everything in the wo…

I will start by agreeing that usage of "war" seems weired. Although scientific drama in fundamental physics is not uncommon but a word like "debate" would be more appropriate.

I don't like your usage of word "Inshallah" as a mock up of the idea that something will never happen. Because it is a complete opposite meaning of when you suppose to use it. It is usually overused by arab moms (I know that people tends to mean that) but I use it frequently. Ironically I was in online meeting at CERN today and used inshallah (sometimes I use it because I am used to) to refer to potential interesting signal I am seeing. I used it to describe the hope that this will not turn out to be a statistical flactuation.

Also I would agree that this is messy at the time when Einstein published his work on quantization. He even got Nobel prize on his work on photon quantization not relativity. Of course he was not alone, Max plank was the first to suggest energy discritization.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#113

Post by losvedir »

maronato wrote: post #99
skhunted wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was pointed out that in American English we overuse "war". I pointed out a language that overuses a different word. I imagine most languages have a bunch of phrases involving an overused word. My point was that this phenomenon isn't unique to American English. Your response is that English also overuses another word. I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Your response needlessly called out Arabic for using too much “Allah”. English overuses it the same amount, given that Allah is their word for God.

> English overuses it the same amount

Not even close! I only have experience in the Gulf but they use "allah" words all the time!

"Alhamdulillah" (thank god) is pretty much part of the standard greeting (Pretty much just two people rapid firing a list of phrases at each other simultaneously "peace be with you / and also peace with you / how are you / thank god / how's the family / thank god") and a frequent response to almost any question.

Anything dealing with the future or uncertainty will bring in "Inshallah" (God willing). I remember the first time I asked my cab driver to take me to my destination and he said "Inshallah" that did not give me confidence!

Then there's "bismallah" and "mashallah" which I heard a bunch. And I'm not sure if we can count "yallah, yallah" which is like "hurry, hurry, let's go" which you hear all the time and is derived from "Ya Allah".

I would be willing to bet that Gulf Arabic speakers say "Allah" literally at least 10x if not 100x more than Americans say "God".

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#114

Post by sva_ »

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #57

I choked on this part: > The discussion recalls a messy, largely forgotten episode from the dawn of the quantum era. In 1905, Einstein interpreted experimental data to mean that light is “quantized,” coming in discrete particles now called photons. Others, including Niels Bohr and Max Planck, thought that the classical, wave nature of light might still be saved. [...] Most physicists presume that everything in the wo…

It now appears like there is a war on the inflationary use of the term 'war' in common linguistic use.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#115

Post by VoodooJuJu »

DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #57

I choked on this part: > The discussion recalls a messy, largely forgotten episode from the dawn of the quantum era. In 1905, Einstein interpreted experimental data to mean that light is “quantized,” coming in discrete particles now called photons. Others, including Niels Bohr and Max Planck, thought that the classical, wave nature of light might still be saved. [...] Most physicists presume that everything in the wo…

It's fine to criticize facets of a culture, but this isn't a very intelligent critique, it's just rude.

On the "war" thing - the culture of many Americans has a martial bent to it, which is why things like "war" made its way into a lot of our idioms and phrases and way of thinking. It's not bad writing just because your cultural mode of thought doesn't consider "war" as an acceptable metaphor or idiom.

Martial cultures don't need to "get a grip" any more than scholarly or pastoral ones need to. Culture is self-preserving and so the martial aspects of ours aren't going away anytime soon, so I suggest you find a way to be more tolerant and understanding of it.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#116

Post by kevindamm »

sva_ wrote: post #114
DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #57

I choked on this part: > The discussion recalls a messy, largely forgotten episode from the dawn of the quantum era. In 1905, Einstein interpreted experimental data to mean that light is “quantized,” coming in discrete particles now called photons. Others, including Niels Bohr and Max Planck, thought that the classical, wave nature of light might still be saved. [...] Most physicists presume that everything in the wo…

It now appears like there is a war on the inflationary use of the term 'war' in common linguistic use.

We don't want it to escalate to a word war.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#117

Post by omnicognate »

eterevsky wrote: post #98

So the article says that Freeman Dyson calculated that only one graviton capture event would happen per billion years in a detector the size of the Earth. The new experiment however proposes to use 15 kg of super-cooled Beryllium. My question is: what's the difference between the proposed Beryllium slab and Dyson's theoretical detector?

I don't fully understand it, but I think the difference is in the source of the gravitons rather than the detector. Dyson's earth-sized detector was imagined to be detecting gravitons produced by mass moving around within the sun, but this detector would be detecting gravitons associated with gravitational waves produced by ridiculously powerful events like black hole mergers, where two massive objects circle each other at mind-boggling speeds before colliding. It sounds like these are expected to produce vastly more gravitons, making a detection much more likely.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#118

Post by sourcepluck »

losvedir wrote: post #113
maronato wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your response needlessly called out Arabic for using too much “Allah”. English overuses it the same amount, given that Allah is their word for God.

> English overuses it the same amount Not even close! I only have experience in the Gulf but they use "allah" words all the time! "Alhamdulillah" (thank god) is pretty much part of the standard greeting (Pretty much just two people rapid firing a list of phrases at each other simultaneously "peace be with you / and also peace with you / how are you / thank god / how's the family / thank god") and a frequent response…

For one of your next trips I suggest a few months in Ireland, and if you could in particular spend time living in a slightly more rural or at least small-town type family.

Jaysus lads, that chap... Christ, sure how would ya... Holy lord! I've never heard... My God, did you hear... Lord help us and save us, she'd only...

And I'm leaving out the more vulgar variants here.

I'm not saying we'd beat some of the Arabic countries, but I definitely am saying we very well might give them a good run for their money. I'll consciously try tone it down if I'm conversing with a non-Irish person, and then with my family I'll let loose.

Maybe Americans use God-related idioms a lot less than us, of course. The U.S. is a relatively big place though, so I'd be curious to know if there aren't some corners closer to (rural?) Ireland's usage.

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#119

Post by digging »

elashri wrote: post #112
DemocracyFTW2 wrote: post #57

I choked on this part: > The discussion recalls a messy, largely forgotten episode from the dawn of the quantum era. In 1905, Einstein interpreted experimental data to mean that light is “quantized,” coming in discrete particles now called photons. Others, including Niels Bohr and Max Planck, thought that the classical, wave nature of light might still be saved. [...] Most physicists presume that everything in the wo…

I will start by agreeing that usage of "war" seems weired. Although scientific drama in fundamental physics is not uncommon but a word like "debate" would be more appropriate. I don't like your usage of word "Inshallah" as a mock up of the idea that something will never happen. Because it is a complete opposite meaning of when you suppose to use it. It is usually overused by arab moms (I know that people tends to mea…

> I don't like your usage of word "Inshallah" as a mock up of the idea that something will never happen.

Oh, I read it differently (perhaps misunderstood). I interpreted the usage as "a required rote phrase/story rubber-stamped onto every piece". I understand how that, too, could be offensive, but I didn't see how inserting the literal meaning of the phrase made sense?

Re: It might be possible to detect gravitons after all

#120

Post by slibhb »

maronato wrote: post #99
skhunted wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was pointed out that in American English we overuse "war". I pointed out a language that overuses a different word. I imagine most languages have a bunch of phrases involving an overused word. My point was that this phenomenon isn't unique to American English. Your response is that English also overuses another word. I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Your response needlessly called out Arabic for using too much “Allah”. English overuses it the same amount, given that Allah is their word for God.

Nah. English speakers use God-based exclamations from time to time but they generally do not pepper their sentences with "God willing", "praise God," etc like Arabs do.

That said, I do not care at all that Arabs used "God" a lot or that Americans (supposedly) use "war" a lot. If anything, I like these sorts of differences.

Post reply on HN