Advancing LQG: Challenges and Possibilities for Experimental Proof

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Moayd Shagaf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experimental Lqg Proof
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the challenges of experimentally proving Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) compared to string theory. Both theories face significant hurdles due to the requirement for extremely high energies to probe quantum gravitational effects. However, there is potential for experimental validation through the observation of evaporating black holes, which may reveal radiation predicted by LQG. The conversation emphasizes the need for theoretical physicists to unify known interactions and develop coherent reasoning to explain physical interactions, highlighting the distinction between data pattern recognition and logical inference systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) principles
  • Familiarity with string theory concepts
  • Knowledge of quantum gravitational effects
  • Awareness of black hole evaporation phenomena
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of black hole evaporation on LQG predictions
  • Study methods for unifying fundamental interactions in physics
  • Explore the philosophical implications of information vs. realism in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate current experimental setups for high-energy physics research
USEFUL FOR

Theoretical physicists, researchers in quantum gravity, and anyone interested in the experimental challenges of proving advanced physics theories like LQG and string theory.

Moayd Shagaf
Messages
38
Reaction score
12
What issues we have in prove LQG experimentally? and It is eaiser to prove than string theory? If so , why There's a lot of string theorist than LQG?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
My rudimentary understanding is that the basic issue is the same in that we need incredibly high energies for experiments to probe quantum gravitational effects, thus any theory of quantum gravity is going to run into this issue, be it string theory, LQG, etc...

This is not the be all and end all however, for example there is reason to believe that by observing evaporating black holes we may detect a certain type of radiation predicted by LQG, this experiment is only in it's very early and highly theoretical stages however.
 
In theory both extremely high energy experiments or possibly very large scale cosmological observations might help and it would be great fun if something truly new or unexpected are found but from a human resource perspective these extremal probings must have a practical limit and i personally think an intrigued theorist can be welll occupied for quite some time even without further data - just like some mathematicians are busy cleaning up where theoretical physicist left off.

So without more data what can we do?

1) Unify the known interactions and reduce the number of free parameters!

2) Find the right coherent reasoning that shall explain the logic of physical interactions. Information vs realism vs solipsism and all this "observerstuff".

Until i grasped these two points i see many alternative ways to spend My taxmoney. Theorist work trying to find patterns in data and theorist work trying to find patterns i the logical inference systems are quite different.

I think the latter is the task of todays theoretical physicists.

/Fredrik
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K