Runes, tarot, and fortune oh my

and

Friday, October 30, 2015

2014? And I'm Only hearing about this NOW?


 

April 23, 2014

"Spacetime is an Emerging Phenomenon" --Does It Violate Einstein's Special Relativity?


Blackholes_600 (2)

What if spacetime were a kind of fluid? This is the question tackled by theoretical physicists working on quantum gravity by creating models attempting to reconcile gravity and quantum mechanics. Some of these models predict that spacetime at the Planck scale (10-33cm) is no longer continuous – as held by classical physics – but discrete in nature. Just like the solids or fluids we come into contact with every day, which can be seen as made up of atoms and molecules when observed at sufficient resolution. A structure of this kind generally implies, at very high energies, violations of Einstein's special relativity (a integral part of general relativity).
In this theoretical framework, it has been suggested that spacetime should be treated as a fluid. In this sense, general relativity would be the analogue to fluid hydrodynamics, which describes the behaviour of fluids at a macroscopic level but tells us nothing about the atoms/molecules that compose them. Likewise, according to some models, general relativity says nothing about the "atoms" that make up spacetime but describes the dynamics of spacetime as if it were a "classical" object. Spacetime would therefore be a phenomenon "emerging" from more fundamental constituents, just as water is what we perceive of the mass of H2O molecules that form it. Stefano Liberati, professor at the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) in Trieste, and Luca Maccione, a research scientist at the Ludwig-Maximilian University in Munich, have devised innovative ways of using the tolls of elementary particle physics and high energy astrophysics to describe the effects that should be observed if spacetime were a fluid. Liberati and Maccione also proposed the first observational tests of these phenomena. Their paper has just been published in the journal Physical Review Letters.
Quantum mechanics is able to effectively explain three of the four fundamental forces of the Universe (electromagnetism, weak interaction and strong interaction). But it does not explain gravity, which is currently only accounted for by general relativity, a theory developed in the realm of classical physics. Identifying a plausible model of quantum gravity (that is, a description of gravity within a quantum physics framework) is therefore one of the major challenges physics is facing today. However, despite the many models proposed to date, none has proved satisfactory or, more importantly, amenable to empirical investigation. Studies like the one carried out by Liberati and Maccione provide new instruments for assessing the value of possible scenarios for quantum gravity.
In the past, models considering spacetime as emerging, like a fluid, from more fundamental entities assumed and studied effects that imply changes in the propagation of photons, which would travel at different speeds depending on their energy. But there's more to it: "If we follow up the analogy with fluids it doesn't make sense to expect these types of changes only" explains Liberati. "If spacetime is a kind of fluid, then we must also take into account its viscosity and other dissipative effects, which had never been considered in detail".
Liberati and Maccione catalogued these effects and showed that viscosity tends to rapidly dissipate photons and other particles along their path, "And yet we can see photons travelling from astrophysical objects located millions of light years away!" he continues. "If spacetime is a fluid, then according to our calculations it must necessarily be a superfluid. This means that its viscosity value is extremely low, close to zero".
"We also predicted other weaker dissipative effects, which we might be able to see with future astrophysical observations. Should this happen, we would have a strong clue to support the emergent models of spacetime", concludes Liberati. "With modern astrophysics technology the time has come to bring quantum gravity from a merely speculative view point to a more phenomenological one. One cannot imagine a more exciting time to be working on gravity".
The Daily Galaxy via International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA)
Image credit: http://www.interactions.org/sgtw/2006/0927/images/blackholes_600.jpg

Comments

On the occasion of the publication of this article, please let me write some of my thoughts about the meaning of “space-time”.
Today many articles of physics, explaining gravity, referred to, using, or relying on the concept of “space-time”. But, are there examples that prove with some clarity, the physical meaning of the concept of “space-time”? This question, I've been doing for thirty years, but so far I have not gotten a convincing answer or an example explaining to me what “space-time” it is.
The reason I do the above question is because that, I have proven that the mathematical proof of the concept of “space-time”, based on the wrong axiom of the constant speed of light of the special theory of relativity and perhaps it is a concept that might to not exist.
With this concept, I think that there should to not be established “de facto”, so basic concepts, which are the foundations of a theory, when these concepts based on ambiguities.
"Space-Time" is irrelevant in an eternal Universe where everything is moving i cyclical and circuital motions of in- and outfolding patterns.
I wonder if this will help or hurt our attempts at warp speed travel?
Somewhere in a far corner of the GT (Grand Tensor) we may find time is linked to a metric, as yet undiscovered, by a relationship equivalent to Maxwell’s equations for electromagnetic coupling. The energy to get there will be terribly high for macro scale considerations, but at Planck scale dimensions, energy densities might be sufficient to ‘travel' up and down the time metric. When we finally get to that sector of the 'GT', it will be interesting to see if and what ‘drops out’ as a constant analogous to the speed of light, ‘c’. (The speed’ of Time? Well, maybe so - time may prove to be variable.) And will Time have a field representation that decoheres upon measurement like a photon wave function? Will we find a 'Time-on’ vitual particle capable of penetrating universes? As for the ‘GT’ itself, current string theory, with its eleven or so dimensions, will probably be looked back on as a quaint underestimation of what’s really going on - there might be an infinite number of dimensions which are unreachable because there is not enough energy in this universe to do so.
Looks more like a gas because for example electrons can act like waves in it (also we don`t see the air but it`s here), it is compressible unlike liquids. I know it`s very hard to compress space, but it can be if you have enough power(mass). If space is as we presume, than it is made of very small particles that`s why it has close to no viscosity (very small particles don`t interfere much with atoms). Just saying.
Is it possible to get detection of gravitational waves? There is another fantasy of the physicists to make something so much desired as a reality, because “big bang” never happen!....Why ? Well, see Q&A USM www.kanevuniverse.com But the gravitational waves exist and it has nothing to do with the hypothetical “big bang”. See the next: According to USM www.kanevuniverse.com the galaxies in our space are atoms (nuclei) in the over space…why it is so and what really are this two spaces You can see on the site. So when we observe some extremely phenomenon in our space of galaxies, we need always to imagine the processes in our atoms space and that are quantum activation, collisions between atoms and nuclear particles, swallowing and radiation of waves, which have frequency in the over space in accordance with efficient of time connection between the spaces, see part II USM www.kanevuniverse.com That is in force about the decision on the age of the galaxies which we observe from our position of observation the Sun and it is means that firstly we must to decide whether there are some energy stimulation in accordance with above and then to decide which galaxy is older and which is younger. So let calculate how will look like the frequency of some atom’s quantum stimulation in our space of atoms, transported into the over space where the galaxies in our space are the atoms (nuclei) in the over space. We need simply to multiplied this “our’ frequency by the time constant, which is 〖10〗^31 folds and if for example this frequency is 〖10〗^16 [hrz] then the equivalent “quantum stimulation” of some galaxy in the over space will run about 〖10〗^15 [s]→≈〖10〗^8 [years] i.e. almost 1 billion Earth’s years and this will be only one semi period of this gravitational wave. So obviously about what interference we can talk if there is necessary so long period to observe eventually interference between two such waves? G.Kanev
All bosons are even numbered super groups of fermions. Bosons are not elementary. A Cooper paring effect?

Post a comment





Classical physics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The four major domains of modern physics
Classical physics refers to theories of physics that predate modern, more complete, or more widely applicable theories. If a currently accepted theory is considered to be "modern," and its introduction represented a major paradigm shift, then the previous theories, or new theories based on the older paradigm, will often be referred to as belonging to the realm of "classical" physics.
As such, the definition of a classical theory depends on context. Classical physical concepts are often used when modern theories are unnecessarily complex for a particular situation.

























Our Partners

technology partners






About Us/Privacy Policy

For more information on The Daily Galaxy and to contact us please visit this page.


gumgum-verify

No comments:

Post a Comment