"Newton's space is the gravitational field"?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Carlo Rovelli's book "Reality is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity" posits that the universe consists of particles and fields, negating the need for an independent concept of space. The assertion "Newton's space is the gravitational field" is debated, as traditional Newtonian gravitation operates within spacetime, unlike General Relativity where gravity is intertwined with spacetime. Rovelli's theory suggests that at quantum scales, distance behaves like a quantum measurement, with space resembling a dynamic quantum foam. This perspective challenges conventional views by emphasizing that changes in measured distance, rather than space itself, are responsible for gravity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newtonian Gravitation
  • Familiarity with General Relativity
  • Basic knowledge of quantum mechanics
  • Concept of spacetime in physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the implications of quantum foam in modern physics
  • Study the differences between Newtonian and Einsteinian gravity
  • Investigate the concept of distance as a quantum measurement
  • Read more about emerging theories in quantum gravity
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the intersection of quantum mechanics and gravity will benefit from this discussion.

mieral
Messages
203
Reaction score
5
I just read Carlo Rovelli new book "Reality is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity" in one sitting and quoting the relevant passage:

"The world is not made up of space + particles + electromagnetic field + gravitational field. The world is made up of particles + fields, and nothing else; there is no need to add space as an extra ingredient. Newton's space is the gravitational field. Or vice versa, which amounts to saying the same thing: the gravitational field is space"

Is the phrase "Newton's space is the gravitational field" correct if one will repeat it in articles?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've always read that Newtonian Gravitation existed within spacetime, much like how objects and other fields exist within spacetime. This is unlike in General Relativity where gravitation is not separate from spacetime.
 
I think Rovelli was talking about space existing in the classical way. As I understood it he was saying that at the smallest scale distance needs to be treated as a quantum measurement in a similar way to energy, with a 'smallest possible' distance existing. He describes space as like a quantum foam where distance is effectively defined by the number of 'bubbles' between two points. The geometry is constantly changing at any point so actual 'distances' are calculated in a statistical manner. A higher density (as measured in classical space) of matter or energy would lead to an increased density of 'bubbles' effectively increasing the distance measured between two points. This then becomes the cause of the 'bending' of space in General Relativity and is what leads to gravity.

To say that Newtons space is the gravitational field would be missing a key point. The change in measured distance within Newtons space is what leads to gravity, not the space itself.

It is worth noting that Rovelli stresses that this is an emerging science and many of the conclusions are still highly speculative. That said, it was a good read and the broad sweep of ideas fits very well with my world view.
 
It sounds like a pop sci book. Please recognize that pop sci books are meant for entertainment rather than education.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K