Einstein makes extra dimensions TOE the line

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Albert Einstein's principle of the constancy of the speed of light has been reaffirmed, effectively ruling out several theories that propose extra dimensions and a complex fabric of space. Specifically, models involving large extra dimensions are negated by the observed absorption in high-energy spectra of nearby BL Lac objects, indicating that quantum gravity scales exceed the Planck mass scale. Additionally, theories such as loop quantum gravity with a preferred inertial frame are dismissed based on these findings. Alternative models, including those with quartic momentum terms and Lorentz invariant quantum gravity models, are suggested for further exploration.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum gravity concepts
  • Familiarity with high-energy astrophysics and BL Lac objects
  • Knowledge of Lorentz invariance in physics
  • Basic principles of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) and blazars
NEXT STEPS
  • Research "quantum gravity models" and their implications
  • Study "high-energy spectra analysis" in astrophysics
  • Explore "loop quantum gravity" and its alternatives
  • Investigate "blazar jet dynamics" and their observational significance
USEFUL FOR

Astrophysicists, theoretical physicists, and researchers interested in the implications of quantum gravity and the nature of high-energy cosmic phenomena.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,213
Reaction score
2,658
Scientists say that Albert Einstein's principle of the constancy of the speed of light holds up under extremely tight scrutiny, a finding that rules out certain theories predicting extra dimensions and a "frothy" fabric of space.

http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/2003/1212einstein.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
What I want to know is why are those two black hole particle beams "aimed directly at the Earth"? Coincidence? I think not...
 
That's funny, but maybe you should take a look at this,

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0308214

"Some models with large extra dimensions are ruled out by the existence of absorption in the very high energy spectra of nearby BL Lac objects. The fact that more distant brighter sources are not seen can also be taken as indirect evidence of intergalactic absorption by pair production interactions. The constraints based on analysis of the Crab Nebula γ-ray spectrum, discussed in the previous section, imply that the quantum gravity scale is orders of magnitude above the Planck mass scale. This indicates that the class of models considered here with linear Planck scale suppressed terms in the dispersion relations cannot be reflective of physics at the Planck scale. Models such as loop quantum gravity with a preferred inertial frame are ruled out by this line of reasoning. Alternative models to consider might be models with quartic momentum terms with M_{QG}^2 supression in the dispersion relations, Lorentz invariant quantum gravity models, or really new Planck scale physics such as string theory, which preserves Lorentz invariance."[/color]
 
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
What I want to know is why are those two black hole particle beams "aimed directly at the Earth"? Coincidence? I think not...
Ah blazars! They're really no different from other active galactic nuclei (AGNs), just that by chance we're looking straight down the jets. You can use data on the observed blazar sky density to do several consistency checks of AGN models; e.g. if the jets have an opening angle of x radians, then the sky density of AGNs should be \frac{4\pi}{x}.

A good collection of links:
http://wwwospg.pg.infn.it/blazarsintheweb.htm

BTW, there are several threads with related discussions (including reference to the very same Stecker paper) in our very own PF Special & General Relativity board.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K