B Can Spacetime be Torn According to Quantum Theory of Gravity?

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter singularity18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spacetime
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether spacetime can be torn according to quantum theory of gravity, with participants noting that spacetime is not a tangible fabric that can be ripped, as per Einstein's laws. While wormholes are theorized to exist, creating one by tearing spacetime is deemed impossible. String theory offers a new perspective, suggesting that at quantum scales, spacetime may exhibit chaotic properties where rips could occur, but these would be contained by protective structures formed by strings. The conversation also touches on the potential misinterpretation of Einstein's terminology regarding spacetime as a "fabric." Ultimately, the consensus is that spacetime cannot be torn in a conventional sense.
singularity18
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Would, assuming a quantum theory of gravity, space time be able to be torn. Or is this only possible withe the assumption of string theory? If such a tear were possible what implications would it have on the universe?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Spacetime isn't something that can be "torn". It doesn't matter which theory you use.
 
Looks like I recalled correctly. This is the second time in recent days I'm encountering this question and it reminded me of something I heard in a documentary. It seems you can blame Brian Greene for this.
But there's a hitch: to create a wormhole, you've got to rip or tear a hole in the fabric of space. But can the fabric of space really rip? Can this first step toward forming a wormhole actually happen? Well, you can't answer these questions on an empty stomach.
Unfortunately, according to Einstein's laws, this is impossible. They say that space can stretch and warp, but it cannot rip. Wormholes might exist somewhere fully formed, but you could not rip space to create a new one, over Manhattan or anywhere else. In other words, I can't take a wormhole to work.

But now string theory is giving us a whole new perspective on space, and it's showing us that Einstein wasn't always right. To see how, let's take a much closer look at the spatial fabric.

If we could shrink down to about a millionth of a billionth of our normal size, we'd enter the world of quantum mechanics, the laws that control how atoms behave. It's the world of light and electricity and everything else that operates at the smallest of scales. Here, the fabric of space is random and chaotic. Rips and tears might be commonplace. But if they were, what would stop a rip in the fabric of space from creating a cosmic catastrophe?

Well, this is where the power of strings comes in. Strings calm the chaos. And as a single string dances through space, it sweeps out a tube. The tube can act like a bubble that surrounds the tear, a protective shield with profound implications. Strings actually make it possible for space to rip.

Source
 
ShayanJ said:
It seems you can blame Brian Greene for this.
And for many other misconceptions that we have to debunk over and over here on PF.
 
singularity18 said:
space time be able to be torn
Einstein made a very unfortunate statement that there is a spacetime "fabric", as though it is a "thing" that can be warped, stretched, etc. As @Nugatory has pointed out, it is no such thing.
 
phinds said:
Einstein made a very unfortunate statement that there is a spacetime "fabric"
I am not familiar with this source, but couldn't it be just a wrong translation: the German "Stoff" could also mean "structure".
 
Hill said:
I am not familiar with this source, but couldn't it be just a wrong translation: the German "Stoff" could also mean "structure".
If so, it would not make your belief that spacetime can be "torn" any less incorrect.
 
phinds said:
If so, it would not make your belief that spacetime can be "torn" any less incorrect.
I don't think @Hill does believe that - you may be mixing him up with either singularity18 (the OP) or paddyc (who necro'd this 2016 thread).

The idea that "fabric" is a mistranslation is an interesting one. I wonder if anyone knows an original reference for "fabric"?
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes berkeman, PeroK, phinds and 1 other person
Ibix said:
I don't think @Hill does believe that - you may be mixing him up with either singularity18 (the OP) or paddyc (who necro'd this 2016 thread).
OOPS. Thanks for that correction.
 
  • #10
Ibix said:
paddyc (who necro'd this 2016 thread)
Looks like his post was shoved into a rip in spacetime which was then closed up behind it. :wink:
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes Nugatory, Ibix, phinds and 1 other person
  • #11
jtbell said:
Looks like his post was shoved into a rip in spacetime which was then closed up behind it. :wink:
Yep, that’s on me. I was performing a routine postectomy, looks like I left a sponge behind when I sutured things up.
 
  • Haha
Likes jtbell and berkeman

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top