Time and space in Quantum gravity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of spacetime in the context of quantum gravity, exploring whether spacetime is merely a geometric construct or has a material essence. Participants examine the implications of general relativity and string theory on the understanding of spacetime, particularly in relation to concepts of time and singularities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the circular reasoning in general relativity regarding the use of spacetime to describe the stress-energy tensor, suggesting a potential conflict in definitions.
  • Another participant distinguishes between spacetime topology and spacetime metric, noting that topology can exist independently of the metric, which is dynamic in general relativity.
  • A participant raises the question of whether spacetime is a material entity or an a priori concept in physics, linking this to the observer's experience of time.
  • Reference is made to a mini-program at the Kavli Institute, indicating that both Loop Quantum Gravity and String Theory suggest a need for a new understanding of spacetime, especially near black holes and the Big Bang.
  • Concerns are expressed about the potential need to discard current concepts of space and time, with a call for a direct approach to the spacetime problem to yield meaningful results in physics.
  • One participant reflects on the historical development of mathematics in physics, suggesting that current theoretical frameworks may lack the necessary mathematical tools to advance understanding, particularly in string theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of spacetime, with no consensus reached. Some argue for the necessity of reevaluating spacetime concepts, while others focus on the distinctions between theoretical approaches. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the fundamental nature of spacetime.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the complexity of defining spacetime, noting the dependence on various theoretical frameworks and the unresolved nature of key concepts such as time evolution in generally covariant theories.

Timeismatter
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
In Einstein equation of general relativity, one side is stress-energy tensor and the other side is the Einstein tensor (functions of metric tensor). But the problem is in order to describe the matter field/stress-energy tensor, we have to use the space and time, which are determined by the metric tensor. So there is some circular reasoning here. Is the spacetime just some geometry or a real field carrying energy?
In the string theory, a string exists in a 26 or 11 or 10 dimensional spacetime. But could the spacetime exists as some kind of container for the string?
Is spacetime some kind of material or a priori notion of physics?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One should distinguish between spacetime topology and spacetime metric. The former may be defined even without the latter. Only the latter is explicitly dynamical in general relativity (GR), including the most of quantum versions of GR.
 
Timeismatter said:
Is spacetime some kind of material or a priori notion of physics?

Time is ticks on the observer's clock.
 
You may be interested to know that one of the endpoints (I hesitate to say conclusions) of the mini-program on singularity resolution at the Kavli Institute of Theoretical Physics (Jan. 2007) was that a new view of space-time is needed by both the Loop Quantum Gravity approach and the String Theory approach to understand what happens physically at or near black holes and/or the Big Bang.

In Thomas Thielmann's first seminar at the mini-program, he considers the problem of time to be 1. the lack of a canonical Hamiltonian in generally covarient theories, and 2. there is no time evolution of observables, resulting in a frozen picture.

More simply, I should say your question is an open problem of some importance in the theoretical physics community.

R
 
Last edited:
I don't think it is too unexpected/freak to discard the present concept of space and time. The question is what spacetime is. Could we think/experiment withouth the concept of spacetime? Loop quantum gravity attacks the problem mainly from GR viewpoint, while string theory attacks the problem from QM viewpoint. But I am not sure whether the last winner will be either of the two. Without attacking at the spacetime problem directly there will be no real results of the physics concerning the world.
Many results from the string theory are beautiful and have a clear brand of Ed Witten's influence. But I guess to distinguish physics and mathematics is a necessary job we need to do. Compared with the era of Newton, Newton needed to develop the necessary mathematics calculus to describe his mechanics. Einstein didn't need to develop Riemann geometry to write the equation of GR. Heisenberg didn't need to invent the matrix and spectral theory to develop the Matrix mechanics. But today we even don't know what kinds of basic mathematics tools we need. String theoreticians are just speculating on every kind of physics/mathematics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K