Undergrad Detecting Gravitons?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sbrothy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
Recent discussions highlight a growing number of research papers focused on detecting single gravitons, including methods like photon-graviton quantum state conversion. There is skepticism regarding the feasibility of these detection efforts, with some suggesting they may be overly optimistic or even unrealistic. While some papers present hopeful conclusions, others argue that the search for gravitons could be a lengthy and challenging process. The overall sentiment reflects a mix of curiosity and doubt about the potential for successful graviton detection. The conversation underscores the complexity and uncertainty surrounding advancements in quantum gravity research.
sbrothy
Gold Member
Messages
1,377
Reaction score
1,232
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this:

Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.)

Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion

Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit?

Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it.

If not please ignore me.

EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but there’s always hope. :)

EDIT:

Effective Field Theory Calculation of LIGO-like Compton Scattering and Experiment Proposal for Graviton Detection

Gravitational Wave and Quantum Graviton Interferometer Arm Detection of Gravitons

The opposite viewpoint:

Infeasibility of Graviton Detection as Cosmic Censorship

And some general comments. I'll start with this one:

Comments on graviton detection

EDIT2: Just for the record @phinds ”liked” the post before the EDITs. It’s a bad habit editing my posts but I don’t want to bump them nedslessly either.

EDIT3: So I use tricks like luring people back in. :smile:
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Oh, the thread is the first one anyway.

Well then, the comments paper above, although trying to strike an optimistic tone in it’s conclusion, makes a rather convincing case (to my uneducated ears) for the opposite. By which I mean the search will likely be long and arduous.
 
Last edited:
I thought I would start a thread, as as spinoff to perhaps highlight and contemplate of that the ideas in the paper mitchell porter pointed to means. I just started to sniff it.. and wrote in the other thread "How to fix Relativistic QM so it's consistent?" Indeed fixing relativity and how to understnad equivalences, seems to be the central issue of the below paper. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Huge paper, I havent ready it through fully but skimmed...

Similar threads

Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
9K
Replies
24
Views
8K
Replies
12
Views
3K