How do General Relativity and the concept of the graviton relate to each other?

AI Thread Summary
General relativity describes gravity as the curvature of space-time caused by matter, while the graviton is a theoretical particle proposed in quantum gravity. These two concepts are not directly linked, as the graviton remains an assumption without a verified theory connecting it to general relativity. Detecting a graviton would not invalidate general relativity but could help unify quantum mechanics with general relativity. The evolution of theories in physics often extends previous models without replacing them entirely, similar to how special relativity expanded upon Newtonian mechanics. Ultimately, successful theories may not need to correspond to physical reality, as their predictive power is what matters most.
repugno
Messages
78
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

I seem to be misunderstanding a concept; perhaps someone could point me in the right direction. My knowledge of physics is very basic so please have some sympathy. Thanks

General relativity shows that gravity is caused by the presence of matter that curves space-time. But now I read of gravity having a particle called the graviton. How do these two ideas link?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
They don't. Since the graviton is a assumption of Quantum gravity it is not tied to GR by a verified theory. Much work is being done to attempt to detect a graviton as this would go along ways toward verifying Quantum Gravity.
 
So if they find the graviton it would mean that General relativity is wrong?
 
No, It would mean that we are closer to being able to tie Quantum Mechanics and GR together. What ever theory evolves will have to agree with the successful predictions of GR. Just like SR extended rather then replaced Newtonian Mechanics.
 
The success of a theory does not need to have any tie to a physical reality. It helps in visualising the effects if it does but if you have some way of determining a property such as gravity and it works then there is no reason to dismiss it because there is no physical reality. Wave particle duality is a good example. Sometimes it is good to model an electron as a particle such as in mechanics and other times like atomic physics it is best to model it as a wave function.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This hypothesis of scientists about the origin of the mysterious signal WOW seems plausible only on a superficial examination. In fact, such a strong coherent radiation requires a powerful initiating factor, and the hydrogen atoms in the cloud themselves must be in an overexcited state in order to respond instantly. If the density of the initiating radiation is insufficient, then the atoms of the cloud will not receive it at once, some will receive it earlier, and some later. But then there...

Similar threads

Back
Top