Questions on General Relativity and Beyond

Drakkith
Mentor
Messages
23,175
Reaction score
7,625
To my understanding General Relativity is a theory of geometry. Is it mandatory that the next step beyond GR also be a theory of geometry, or is there/could there be something else that is believed to give the same results without using geometry?

I hope that makes sense.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
GR is a theory of spacetime geometry. String theory has geometry, but the geometry doesn't have a direct interpretation as spacetime, so spacetime geometry is not fundamental, but is instead emergent at low energies. In contrast in LQG or Asymptotic Safety, the degrees of freedom up to arbitrarily high energies are spacetime geometry. We don't know which one is correct (if any).
 
Drakkith said:
To my understanding General Relativity is a theory of geometry. Is it mandatory that the next step beyond GR also be a theory of geometry, or is there/could there be something else that is believed to give the same results without using geometry?
...

If it gives the same results then people will probably call it geometry. And so it will be geometry.

Over time, language evolves, and mathematics (a kind of language) evolves. What geometry IS (the concepts, practices, definitions, proven theorems) has evolved. There is no fixed essence. The meaning of words is their accepted use. One has to allow people that mental freedom. The community of physicists and mathematicians will collectively decide what to call it, and therefore what it IS, when the time comes, as they always do. And they may call it geometry.

You say GR is a "theory of geometry", Dra. The main equation has geometry on the LHS and MATTER on the RHS and shows how they interact. But I see you do not all it a "theory of geometry-and-matter". I take that to be an omen or sign-of-the-times.
Maybe from now onward, we will talk like you, and when we say "geometry" we will tacitly include the thought that it is dynamic geometry interacting with matter that we really mean.

I would be in favor of that linguistic drift. It's nice to keep the number of syllables down so terms are easy to say, and for language to be concise.
 
Awesome, thanks guys.
 
Thread 'LQG Legend Writes Paper Claiming GR Explains Dark Matter Phenomena'
A new group of investigators are attempting something similar to Deur's work, which seeks to explain dark matter phenomena with general relativity corrections to Newtonian gravity is systems like galaxies. Deur's most similar publication to this one along these lines was: One thing that makes this new paper notable is that the corresponding author is Giorgio Immirzi, the person after whom the somewhat mysterious Immirzi parameter of Loop Quantum Gravity is named. I will be reviewing the...
I seem to notice a buildup of papers like this: Detecting single gravitons with quantum sensing. (OK, old one.) Toward graviton detection via photon-graviton quantum state conversion Is this akin to “we’re soon gonna put string theory to the test”, or are these legit? Mind, I’m not expecting anyone to read the papers and explain them to me, but if one of you educated people already have an opinion I’d like to hear it. If not please ignore me. EDIT: I strongly suspect it’s bunk but...
Back
Top