I Is Spacetime a Real Physical Entity or Merely a Conceptual Framework in Physics?

Click For Summary
Spacetime is debated as either a real physical entity or a conceptual framework in physics, with its nature tied to the geometry of the universe. It is described mathematically in general relativity, where time and space are measured through physical instruments like clocks and rulers. The Einstein field equations explain how spacetime influences the movement of masses, but the discussion raises questions about the definition of a "real world thing." The conversation emphasizes the need for clarity in terminology to foster productive dialogue about spacetime and its implications in physics. Ultimately, the distinction between conceptual and physical reality remains unresolved.
Michael Ray Mooney
Messages
4
Reaction score
3
Given that physics is the study of the physical world, what exactly is spacetime if it is an actual "real world thing", a curved medium or "fabric" guiding the movements of masses, and what is the physics of how this guidance works. As far as I know, space is a vacuum (where not occupied of course) and time is a human concept designating the duration of any specified movement, like Earth's periods of rotationand orbit. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, Dale, PeterDonis and 2 others
Michael Ray Mooney said:
Given that physics is the study of the physical world, what exactly is spacetime if it is an actual "real world thing", a curved medium or "fabric" guiding the movements of masses, and what is the physics of how this guidance works. As far as I know, space is a vacuum (where not occupied of course) and time is a human concept designating the duration of any specified movement, like Earth's periods of rotationand orbit. Thanks.
Modern physics (since Newton) is generally about finding a mathematical model that can be used to predict the outcome of experiments. Spacetime is part of the mathematics of relativity and maps to the experimental concept that events take place at a time and a spatial location.

If you want to study Relativity, you could start with Morin's book, the first chapter of which is available free online:

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/david-morin/files/cmchap11.pdf

This includes an introduction to the concept of spacetime.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, PeterDonis and Ibix
Michael Ray Mooney said:
what exactly is spacetime if it is an actual "real world thing"
Spacetime is the geometry of the “real world”.

Michael Ray Mooney said:
a curved medium or "fabric"
Why should geometry be a fabric or medium?

Michael Ray Mooney said:
what is the physics of how this guidance works
The physics of how spacetime works is described by the Einstein field equations.
 
  • Like
Likes Klystron, cianfa72 and russ_watters
Michael Ray Mooney said:
Given that physics is the study of the physical world, what exactly is spacetime if it is an actual "real world thing", a curved medium or "fabric" guiding the movements of masses, and what is the physics of how this guidance works. As far as I know, space is a vacuum (where not occupied of course) and time is a human concept designating the duration of any specified movement, like Earth's periods of rotationand orbit. Thanks.
We won’t have a productive discussion unless we can say what a “real world thing” is, and the fact that we are compelled to use scare-quotes around the term is a strong hint that we aren’t there.

When we’re studying the physical world we have to start with things that we can (at least in principle) measure. Thus we start with Einstein: time is what a clock measures and distance is what a ruler measures. Observation finds relationships between these that are most effectively described using the methods of differential geometry applied to a pseudo-Riemannian manifold; we have to call that manifold something and “spacetime” is the name that has stuck. Does that make it a “real physical thing”? Who knows? How could we tell? Would the answer affect any measurement or experimental result?

Please take a moment to review this forum’s mission statement. We will gladly work with you if are here to advance your understanding of general relativity and/or to help others do so, but an uncrisp discussion of vaguely defined terms is not what we’re here for.

This thread is closed.
 
Moderator's note: Spin-off from another thread due to topic change. In the second link referenced, there is a claim about a physical interpretation of frame field. Consider a family of observers whose worldlines fill a region of spacetime. Each of them carries a clock and a set of mutually orthogonal rulers. Each observer points in the (timelike) direction defined by its worldline's tangent at any given event along it. What about the rulers each of them carries ? My interpretation: each...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
9K
Replies
72
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K