Ashtekar's Shadow states paper

  • #51
I believe that selfAdjoint for example has acknowledged this (though I can't say he's given up on LQG).

I believe we have gone round and round and come out where we started, but with some knowledge.

1. The quantization used by LQG is a valid quantization (Rehrens).
2. It does not agree with the method used in the rest of quantum mechanics (Distler, Urs).
3. The shadow states paper shows a way that LQG can be tied to low energy quantum physics.
4. Urs thinks this shadow states method is "arbitrary" and I (for what I'm worth) don't. I think it was a new initiative, where the authors were seeking a method, and they found one. Their method should be judged on its results, not on the metagame, or else I'm going to bring up the metagame attacks ("just philosophy", "sweeping infinities under the rug") that have been leveled at string physics and quantum field theory.
5. In the upshot, I don't think the LQG physicists have to modify their quantization in the high energy/small dimension range, but they have a long way to go to come up with a theory that is both mathematically consistent and "necessary" in the sense that each feature follows uniquely from prior features (except for alternate ways to the same goal.) Superstring theory does have this property.

And Urs still hasn't responded on the Meusberger & Rehrens paper.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #52
Originally posted by selfAdjoint
The quantization used by LQG is a valid quantization

This remark requires some defense since...

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
It does not agree with the method used in the rest of quantum mechanics

I think this is currently our common ground of agreement.

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
The shadow states paper shows a way that LQG can be tied to low energy quantum physics

It shows that fock space reps in quantum theories we know are correct can be reformulated in LQG-like terms as polymer reps, nothing more.

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Their method [shadow states] should be judged on its results, not on the metagame...

Would you mind explaining what in the shadow states paper indicates that it can be applied to LQG?

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
...I don't think the LQG physicists have to modify their quantization in the high energy/small dimension range...

Moving from the implausible to the down right silly, are you saying that despite all of this, LQG should still be taken seriously because gravity might be quantized differently at different energies? You should think hard about the implications of this.
 
  • #53
Hi everybody -

I realize that it takes a lot of time to follow the discussion here on PF and filter out the noise produced by some people. Please, if anyone wants to talk with me further about the LQG string, please drop me a note over at the Coffee Table. For instance, just write a comment to this thread.

Thanks!

All the best,
Urs
 
  • #54
selfAdjoint -

as soon as I find the time I write something about Meusburger&Rehren, math-ph/0202041. Sorry for the delay, there are too many things to do! :-)
 
  • #55
Sorry for pushing you Urs. I'm just interested in it.
 
Back
Top