"Newton's space is the gravitational field"?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of Carlo Rovelli's statement that "Newton's space is the gravitational field," as presented in his book "Reality is Not What It Seems: The Journey to Quantum Gravity." Participants explore the implications of this idea within the context of classical and quantum theories of gravity, as well as the nature of space and distance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the correctness of Rovelli's phrase regarding Newton's space and the gravitational field, considering its potential use in articles.
  • Others argue that Newtonian gravitation exists within spacetime, contrasting it with General Relativity where gravitation is not separate from spacetime.
  • A participant interprets Rovelli's view as suggesting that at the smallest scales, distance should be treated as a quantum measurement, leading to a dynamic understanding of space as a 'quantum foam' that influences gravity.
  • It is noted that Rovelli emphasizes the speculative nature of these ideas, suggesting they are part of an emerging science.
  • One participant critiques the book as being more entertainment than educational, implying skepticism about its scientific rigor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of Rovelli's statement and its implications for understanding gravity and space. There is no consensus on the validity of the phrase or the characterization of the book.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the speculative nature of Rovelli's conclusions and the potential limitations of interpreting classical concepts of space in light of emerging quantum theories.

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
2K
  • · 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