- #1

gerald V

- 67

- 3

- TL;DR Summary
- Will background independence hold down to the quantum scale? Is there research on alternatives?

In a textbook, which is not in Englisch language unfortunately, I found a passage saying that intrinsic curvature of spacetime is just a specific definition. The alternative definition is that spacetime is flat, whereas clocks and rods have variable lengths - which is just Feynman’s bug.

Currently one thinks that the above two definitions are equally good and that the flat spacetime is unobsorvable. This is supported from observation, which however has not yet reached the quantum scale. Regarding theory, quantum gravity has not been achieved a century after Planck and Einstein because of the lack of an arena. Disconcertingly, one obesssively removes any reference to an arena even where it would appear quite naturally. „Background independence“ is a strict dogma, which however has Einsteinian gravity (using Riemannian mathematics) as its only scientific justification.

To me it appears as highly likely that at the quantum level it will turn out that the said definitions are not equal. Rather, there actually is a prior intrinsically flat space, and variable clocks and rods live in this arena. This variability has a dynamic, which can be quantized above the flat background.My questions:

- Why does one so strongly believe that background independence will hold down to the quantum scale?

- Didn’t the genius Einstein make a couple of highly sophisticated mistakes (the introduction and withdrawal of the cosmological constant, as well as the assumed locality of quantum interactions as the most prominent), and isn’t background independence likely to be another such sophisticated mistake?

- Is there research and respective literature on the possibility of a flat arena for quantum gravity?

Thank you very much in advance.

Currently one thinks that the above two definitions are equally good and that the flat spacetime is unobsorvable. This is supported from observation, which however has not yet reached the quantum scale. Regarding theory, quantum gravity has not been achieved a century after Planck and Einstein because of the lack of an arena. Disconcertingly, one obesssively removes any reference to an arena even where it would appear quite naturally. „Background independence“ is a strict dogma, which however has Einsteinian gravity (using Riemannian mathematics) as its only scientific justification.

To me it appears as highly likely that at the quantum level it will turn out that the said definitions are not equal. Rather, there actually is a prior intrinsically flat space, and variable clocks and rods live in this arena. This variability has a dynamic, which can be quantized above the flat background.My questions:

- Why does one so strongly believe that background independence will hold down to the quantum scale?

- Didn’t the genius Einstein make a couple of highly sophisticated mistakes (the introduction and withdrawal of the cosmological constant, as well as the assumed locality of quantum interactions as the most prominent), and isn’t background independence likely to be another such sophisticated mistake?

- Is there research and respective literature on the possibility of a flat arena for quantum gravity?

Thank you very much in advance.