Gravity & BECs: Can Spacetime be a Condensate? - arXiv:gr-qc/0503067

  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
555
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0503/0503067.pdf

arXiv:gr-qc/0503067 v1 16 Mar 2005
Can Spacetime be a Condensate?
B. L. Hu
Department of Physics, University of Maryland,
College Park, Maryland 20742-4111, USA
(Dated: March 14, 2005)
We explore further the proposal [1] that general relativity is the hydrodynamic limit of some fundamental
theories of the microscopic structure of spacetime and matter, i.e., spacetime described by a differentiable manifold is an emergent entity and the metric or connection forms are collective variables valid only at the low energy, long wavelength limit of such micro-theories. In this view it is more relevant to find ways to deduce the microscopic ingredients of spacetime and matter from their macroscopic attributes than to find ways to quantize general relativity because it would only give us the equivalent of phonon physics, not the equivalents of atoms or quantum electrodyanmics. It may turn out that spacetime is merely a representation of collective state of matter in some limiting regime of interactions, which is the view expressed by Sakharov [2]. In this talk, working within the conceptual framework of geometro-hydrodynamics, we suggest a new way to look at the nature
of spacetime inspired by Bose-Einstein Condensate (BEC) physics. We ask the question whether spacetime could be a condensate, even without the knowledge of what the ‘atom of spacetime’ is.
We begin with a summary of the main themes for this new interpretation of cosmology and spacetime physics, and the ‘bottom-up’ approach to quantum gravity. We then describe the ‘Bosenova’ experiment of controlled collapse of a BEC and our cosmology-inspired interpretation of its results.
We discuss the meaning of a condensate in different context. We explore how far this idea can sustain, its advantages and pitfalls, and its implications on the basic tenets of physics and existing programs of quantum gravity.
- Invited Talk presented at the Peyresq Meetings of Gravitation and Cosmology, 2004. To appear in Int. J. Theor. Phys.
Electronic address: hub@physics.umd.edu
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Can Spacetime be a Condensate?

I am not sure, is spacetime noisy? maybe in quantum gravity.
 
Space time is most definitely nosiy. The quantum fluctuations in spacetime were deriven by John Wheeler in 1955. It is called quantum foam, spacetime foam, and Wheeler foam, in his honor.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/media2/nav-chicon-3013_01.jpg
The quantum fluctuations in spacetime are on the order of the Planck length, spacetime itself ceases to be smooth, and starts resembling instead, a rapidly changing foam, because of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

The importance of quantum foam is that it is thought to give rise to virtual particles. They pop in and out of existence out of nowhere quicker than Planck time, so they do not succeed in violation of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.

Reginald Cahill developed process physics theory, it says space is a quantum foam system where gravity is an inhomogeneous flow of quantum foam into matter. According to this theory, the spiral galaxy rotation-velocity anomaly can be explained without the need of dark matter.

A few weeks ago a galaxy was found that was and still is thought to be made almost completely out of dark matter.
 
Last edited:
By MK
Space time is most definitely nosiy. The quantum fluctuations in spacetime were deriven by John Wheeler in 1955. It is called quantum foam, spacetime foam, and Wheeler foam, in his honor.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegan...con-3013_01.jpg
The quantum fluctuations in spacetime are on the order of the Planck length, spacetime itself ceases to be smooth, and starts resembling instead, a rapidly changing foam, because of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

The importance of quantum foam is that it is thought to give rise to virtual particles. They pop in and out of existence out of nowhere quicker than Planck time, so they do not succeed in violation of the 1st Law of Thermodynamics.

Reginald Cahill developed process physics theory, it says space is a quantum foam system where gravity is an inhomogeneous flow of quantum foam into matter. According to this theory, the spiral galaxy rotation-velocity anomaly can be explained without the need of dark matter.

A few weeks ago a galaxy was found that was and still is thought to be made almost completely out of dark matter.

Thank you MK, I have some understanding of quantum fluctuations, when
i asked is spacetime noisy i meant is it," detectably noisy in theory", The
BEC approach seems to have possibilities.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
I'm trying to understand the relationship between the Higgs mechanism and the concept of inertia. The Higgs field gives fundamental particles their rest mass, but it doesn't seem to directly explain why a massive object resists acceleration (inertia). My question is: How does the Standard Model account for inertia? Is it simply taken as a given property of mass, or is there a deeper connection to the vacuum structure? Furthermore, how does the Higgs mechanism relate to broader concepts like...
Back
Top