Is Gravity a Field of Virtual Particles or a Curvature of Space-Time?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter physorguser
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of gravity, specifically whether it can be understood as a field of virtual particles (gravitons) or as a curvature of space-time. Participants explore concepts related to quantization of mass and energy, the implications of string theory, and the relationship between different descriptions of gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why energy is not quantized if mass is, suggesting that this raises doubts about the necessity of gravitons in the context of gravity being described as curvature of space.
  • Another participant argues against the quantization of mass, stating that there is no evidence for a "quantum of mass" and provides examples of varying particle masses to support this view.
  • A participant explains that gravitons arise naturally in string theory and serve as a particle-based description of gravitational phenomena, likening them to how photons describe electromagnetism.
  • It is noted that quantization is influenced by boundary conditions, with an example of electron energy being discrete when bound to an atom but not in free space.
  • One participant expresses confusion about whether the virtual particle field of gravitons and the curvature of space-time are fundamentally the same or different, drawing a parallel to different formulations of quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the quantization of mass and energy, the necessity of gravitons, and the relationship between the particle and curvature descriptions of gravity. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives present.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the influence of boundary conditions on the quantization of energy, indicating that the discussion may depend on specific definitions and assumptions regarding mass and energy.

physorguser
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
If mass is quantised and energy is mass why isn't energy quantised. It seems that it's possible to have arbitrarily small amounts of energy.

Then if energy does not need to be quantised, then what is the need for a graviton, when gravity is described as a curvature of space?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mass is not quantized, physorguser. There is no reason to believe it is. For example if it was quantized there would be a smallest mass that every other mass was an exact multiple of, a "quantum of mass", and there is not. The electron's mass is 0.510998928 MeV while the muon's mass is 105.6583715 MeV. It's clear that one is not an exact integer multiple of the other.

As particles go, the electron's mass is pretty small, but the mass of some of the other particles is much smaller still. Neutrinos have nonzero mass: the value is not yet known but believed to be 1 eV or less. A hypothesized particle called the axion may even have a mass as small as 10-6 eV.
 
physorguser said:
Then if energy does not need to be quantised, then what is the need for a graviton, when gravity is described as a curvature of space?

Gravitons arise naturally in string theory, they weren't inserted into it. They're a way of describing gravitational phenomena particle-wise. Gravity's still described as a field, as it is in GR, but just a virtual particle field, like electromagnetism, instead of space time curvature. So gravitons are to gravity as photons are to EM. You don't lose anything describing gravity this way.
 
One thing to remember is that quantization is not coming from the nature of energy/mass itself, it's coming from the surrounding constraints, a.k.a. boundary conditions. Take the (kinetic) energy of the electron as an example, in free space it's not quantized and can have any value. However, once it becomes bound to an atom it will be subject to periodic boundary conditions (orbits were the wavefunction doesn't interfere constructively disappear), and this causes the electron energy to now be discrete, i.e. quantized.
 
Viracocha said:
Gravity's still described as a field, as it is in GR, but just a virtual particle field, like electromagnetism, instead of space time curvature. So gravitons are to gravity as photons are to EM.

Yes, but what I have trouble comprehending, is that it's fine that gravity can be described as a field of virtual particles like the EM field, but when gravity is described as a curvature of space-time, does that mean that spacetime and the virtual field of gravitons are the same thing in a different form or two different things. Or only one thing but with two different descriptions like how Schrod's wave mechanics and Heisenberg's Matrix mechanics were both describing one reality.

Zarqon said:
...

OK thanks, that's cleared that up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K