Does a GUT have to have gravity involved?

  • Thread starter robertroman10
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gravity Gut
In summary: The main unresolved problem in this area is that quantum theory and general relativity lead to nonsensical results when both have to applied at the same time (inside a black hole for example). This is the motivation for the search for a theory which includes both.The main unresolved problem in this area is that quantum theory and general relativity lead to nonsensical results when both have to applied at the same time (inside a black hole for example). This is the motivation for the search for a theory which includes both. However, unification of the three forces (electromagnetism, the weak nuclear force, and the strong nuclear force) has been attempted before, but has not been successful. I think that if gravity were to be added to the theory
  • #1
robertroman10
32
0
To make a grand unified theory "complete", does it have to involve gravity? If gravity is more of a warp of space-time, and less of an actual force, then do we already have a grand unified theory (since we have combined the other 3 forces), or do we NEED gravity to be a force to have a GUT.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The main unresolved problem in this area is that quantum theory and general relativity lead to nonsensical results when both have to applied at the same time (inside a black hole for example). This is the motivation for the search for a theory which includes both.
 
  • #3
mathman said:
The main unresolved problem in this area is that quantum theory and general relativity lead to nonsensical results when both have to applied at the same time (inside a black hole for example). This is the motivation for the search for a theory which includes both.

Ohh I see. So would gravity have to be a force to produce non gibberish results?
 
  • #4
Usually with GUT one means unification of EM, weak and strong interactions. However there exist not even a commonly accepted official GUT. Normally unification measn explainning all three interactions by some common mechanism, rather than just three separately parameterised theories "patched together".

TOE is the term that's used for a GUT + gravity.

If it's consistent to separate the GUT from the TOE without open wires, may be of debate, as suggested by the different research programs.

I don't think the geometrisation of physics has anything at all to do with this problem; how is an "actual force" distinguished from geometric effects anyway? ;)

Geometric methods in physics have been extremely popular that's clear. But I think it's more like a reformulation that IMO has a lot of realist flavour to it. It does not add exaplanatory or predictive power per see. I think it probably adds possible useful ideas (by exploiting tools and results know from geometry). And clearly, this has have good success, not only only in GR but also in SM.

But this may or or many not also be responsible for a lot of people getting stuck thinking in terms of geometry and manifolds. Now, perhaps the next step is not best cast in geometry. Personally I think the geometrisation of physics has been both a gift and a poison.

/Fredrik
 
  • #5
robertroman10 said:
To make a grand unified theory "complete", does it have to involve gravity? If gravity is more of a warp of space-time, and less of an actual force, then do we already have a grand unified theory (since we have combined the other 3 forces), or do we NEED gravity to be a force to have a GUT.

If you really desire to fully understand GUT, then you have to learn about the computer chip after you study matrices. Engineer a microchip and program this chip to graph in 3 dimensions, and you can all start to understand how to think in more than 3 dimensions!
 

FAQ: Does a GUT have to have gravity involved?

1. What is a GUT?

A GUT, or Grand Unified Theory, is a theoretical framework that attempts to unify the three fundamental forces of nature: electromagnetism, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force.

2. Why does a GUT have to have gravity involved?

Gravity is considered one of the fundamental forces of nature, and the other three forces have already been unified in previous theories. Therefore, a complete and consistent GUT must also include gravity.

3. What role does gravity play in a GUT?

In a GUT, gravity acts as the mediator of the other three forces, just like the other forces have their corresponding particles (photon, gluon, and W and Z bosons). It is responsible for the curvature of space-time and the gravitational attraction between masses.

4. Are there any proposed GUTs that don't involve gravity?

There have been various attempts to develop GUTs without including gravity, such as the electroweak theory. However, these theories have not been able to fully explain all observed phenomena and are not widely accepted by the scientific community.

5. How close are we to finding a complete GUT with gravity involved?

While there have been many promising theories and attempts to unify gravity with the other three forces, a complete and consistent GUT with gravity involved has not been achieved yet. It remains one of the biggest challenges in theoretical physics and is an active area of research.

Similar threads

I Unifying string theory and loop quantum gravity
Replies
2
Views
418
Theory of Everything (TOE) Without a Grand Unified Theory (GUT)
Replies
8
Views
3K
Alternatives to GUT and GUT Epoch
Replies
4
Views
3K
I Is Gravity a Force or Curvature?
Replies
4
Views
1K
I What if unification does not work?
Replies
28
Views
3K
A What is gravity in the superfluid vacuum model of quantum gravity?
Replies
4
Views
2K
I The standard model from loop quantum gravity via spinors octonions
Replies
22
Views
1K
B Theory of Loop Quantum Gravity
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Does the graviton have to exist?
Replies
6
Views
2K
A Just standard model and gravity, up to high energies? An update
Replies
4
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top