Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What is the graviton? Please place your definitions

  1. Jul 13, 2004 #1
    1. A quantizied gravitational wave...........
    2. They travel at the speed of light
    3. They have never been experimentally proven to exist.
    4. They have been theoretically proven?
    5. They permeate all dimensions.

    I have some ideas fixed in my head that need to be corrected.

    In another thread Nigel point out the scattering that would take place from photon interaction in such a bulk teaming with these theoretical massless particles.

    This is a fair statement.

    Yet from another perspective if any quantized version of the gravitational waves are considered, it can never represent the whole wave per say but represents part of the wave, meaning, each graviton would be describing differing values of that wave, so scattering would have been specific to each graviton?

    One thing that also materialize in this respect is the relationship to a holographical feature each graviton is describing?

    Please feel free to throw in pros and cons.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2004
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 18, 2004 #2
    Think of a pendulum(the source and it furthest swings)

    If we quantize the graviton, what amount of energy can each graviton contain? Would we consider the gathering of gravitons as describing each point of the wave, so such a wave would need to describe not only the energy released from the oscillatory nature of Mercuries orbits, but of recognizing the strong energy(many gravitons) congregation, in what we have considered of the blackhole?

    This should help one learn what is at stake here in the graviton determnations.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2004
  4. Jul 18, 2004 #3
    What Did Webber Teach us?

    If the aluminum bar allows gravitational waves to transverse through it ,what is happening to the bar?

    Will the bar ring? :smile:

    Will the density of the matters, allow different sounds to be expressed through it? :smile:

     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2004
  5. Jul 18, 2004 #4
    Because a graviton is expected to have very low energy it could be the building block for all other particles.Dark energy may be increasing in its total energy as the universe expands, because graviton energy is being used to construct dark energy.
     
  6. Jul 18, 2004 #5
    Do you think the graviton is the energy that is leaking into extra dimensions?
     
  7. Jul 19, 2004 #6
    Blackhole creation in the Colliders

    I thought it important to bring this post from Blackhole Creation in the Colliders here.



    In such a compactified state how would we coordinate anything? :smile:

    (bold emphasis my own)


    Sometimes it seems incomprehensible how such thoughts could have ever gotten where they are and when one speaks, of what "realm(dimension)" are they speaking? :smile:

    On what journey could any photon take and its interaction not make one wonder? Had it gone somewhere and re-appeared? Would it have been as simpe as looking at the tracks and knowing that some event had taken place and there is a gap?

    http://www-egs.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/egsdemo/newshower.html

    What kind of Quantum "geometry" is going to explain Quantum Gravity?


    'There comes a time when the mind takes a higher plane of knowledge but can never prove how it got there. All great discoveries have involved such a leap. The important thing is not to stop questioning.'

    Albert Einstein
    (1879- 1955)
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2004
  8. Jul 19, 2004 #7
    Welcome to the Cern Simulation Applet

    http://sciencenews.org/20000219/bob1a.jpg


    So have we now discovered where the limits of LQG has gone in terms of TEV measures? I would say so, having realized Glast's limitations.

    https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=255354&postcount=2


    hmmmmmm?
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2004
  9. Jul 28, 2004 #8
    A lot of people are having a hard time of understanding the significance of the graviton and are willy nilly garbage heaping, with outgiving it further thought.

    So I thought I would add a scalable feature pictorially to this undertanding, for people so they understood the significance of the dimensional relationship to the graviton as it exists in this bulk.

    Look at the range the graviton can exist in., Do you understand the significance of this?

    Can the graviton live below Planck length? Because we have reached a limit does not remove the nature of the gravitational forces. Supergrvaity has made its appearnce for us in this dynamical relation

    Of course I am open to corrections
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2004
  10. Jul 29, 2004 #9
    If the Glasses are Put on What is apparent at Supersymmetrical levels?

    It is easy to understanding the dynamcial relationship of the saddle, versus the sphere, and the nature of that triangulation. Those are non-euclidean realzations developed from the fifth postulate?

    Being lead through GR why did Einstein rely on Reimann? Self Evident Truths?

    The non-eucldean world seemed very attractive for obvious reasons, and lead the thinking to move to higher dimensional considerations?

    There had to be something consistant through it all?

    I think if ones considers the "point" on the brane, and supersymmetry, what value would you give a "point". Consider the graviton as time. Discrete structures would not apply here, but "topologies," that are very smooth. :smile:

    I for one do not like uncertainty, but if higher energies are any indications we have found a tesing ground for soemthing that calls for "emergent realities."

    For enjoyment entertain the graviton in all these hidden dimensions of the brane.

    http://www.sukidog.com/jpierre/strings/extradim.gif

    Maybe even entertain the notion Lubos Motl is challenging you? :rofl:


    Strange as it might seem we had been given two perspectives with which to entertain quantum gravity, yet one boasts that it is discrete( caught in the SR world discriptively....LQG Imean) and one is caught in the continous structures......topologically defined(Mtheory). If that isn't "unique," I don't know what is.

    For all its worries they had to have understood it had to be geometrically defined? Is it supergrvaity to gravity and metric formulations? If you consider points plasmatic features, would be very different from cooling features?
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2004
  11. Jul 31, 2004 #10

    GR postulates a continuous space-time that is background independent and QM is a theory of discrete particles interacting within a fixed background space.

    What if the geometry is actually fractal in nature?, a discrete, yet causally connected space-time that is background independent. Gravitons would then be an aspect of the fractal geometry of space-time? GR is a nonlinear theory. Fractals are nonlinear.
     
  12. Aug 1, 2004 #11
    You then would have to explain how it is possible to propagate a wave through the discontinuities. I think part of causality is continuity and connectedness of spacetime. How can you have causality through disconnected or discontinuous spacetime?
     
  13. Aug 1, 2004 #12
    http://www.hypography.com/bilder/superstrings.gif

    Are we not suppose to be able to see outside the region of the reality? What the heck does this mean?

    You would have to join Gr with QM, and produce strings. :smile:

    That leaves a big question, as to how you would explain the nature of reality.

    From a LQG perspective this would be true as to its discreteness, but not from the string perspective, as this would become continous in nature.

    If you think of matter as discrete functions, I can see where you might say this, but if you see matter defined as a strng, then the minimum string state of that particle, will have denoted a string value specifically characteristic of that particle nature.

    The graviton, in gatherings, from one to many, even though quantized from a wave, would have to define the particle nature, topologically? One of the things that I keep coming back too, is how we see? in this new reality.

    Would you see matter in the defined states of existance around now? Or would you see everything as color distinctive and a giant field of intermingling particles much like you would see cherenkov radiation spread out around this object if we saw at the string level?

    Even at the weak field measure, this is the tail end of a larger scalable feature of graviton perceptions in the cosmos. I have a scale, before this post for consideration. If you look at that scale, you would know that this movement is very smooth throughout all those energy considerations

    Urs had a link in descibing the string nature, that I found sometime before he showed it, to try and help wrap minds around this. At the Planck epoch, this would be a really serious question. Image the particle nature of reality being spoken to as the universe expands? What is the one thing that would have to be consistant through all this? The graviton?



    What do you think?
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2004
  14. Aug 1, 2004 #13
    This is where I become confused sometimes about back ground and background independance. If I choose strings I become dependant on the back ground. What does this mean?
     
  15. Aug 1, 2004 #14
    I wanted to add information in this post for consideration

    http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/thorne/

    Considering the scale at which the planck Epoch has been considered here in strings, I also wanted to give some idea of the distance these gravitons can travel? These are freely distributed in the bulk.

    We are able to consider the information from the early universe to now. Why earth and space detectors are being built. Gravitational wave generation once you quantize into graviton, the language that must be built in computer imagery, and this will geometrical reveal I am sure, the topological features, of those events so long ago.

    Does this make sense?
     
  16. Aug 1, 2004 #15
    Gravitons are like dark energy, in that both are names given to concepts that are not well understood. Both of these names are easier to pronounce that question marks, but provide little more information.
     
  17. Aug 1, 2004 #16
    One would have to see this expressed in a different way, and free yourself of limitations.

    (CSPAN Archives Videotape #125054)

    (Greene, The Elegant Universe, pages 248-249)

    I have article that Paultrr wrote that show a pictorial represenation of the expansitory universe but have been having trouble finding. When I do I will place it here.

    If we think of energy concentration, what would this mean in terms of string harmonics? Think of BEC condenstae here and how this might be represented in probabilities. I color pictorial's this woul dbe very significant in early uinverse identification as to the pearls and chains?
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2004
  18. Aug 1, 2004 #17
    A network of fractals would be continuous in the sense of being connected and relational. Similar to the way floor tiles appear to be discrete sections with definable boundaries, yet still a continuously connected network, relating to the others.

    Waves are a probability distribution of particles, each with its own probability of position and momentum.

    Gravitons could be a connected network of relativistic quantum operators.

    An interesting experiment:

    http://www.rowan.edu/news/display_article.cfm?ArticleID=965



    QUOTE:

    In his experiment, Afshar uses a laser beam and a screen with two small pinholes relatively far from each other. A particle goes through a pinhole and eventually hits a screen for detection. Afshar can tell what pinhole the particle goes through, and at the same time he can show that the particle’s path is affected by both pinholes. According to the standard theory of quantum physics, this is not possible. If the result of the experiment holds, it means that the standard theory of quantum mechanics is still incomplete, which was Einstein’s long-held view.


     
  19. Aug 2, 2004 #18
  20. Aug 2, 2004 #19
    If the boundaries of the individual cells in the network are not physical, then they are arbitrary constructions for our mathematical convenience. If they are physical, then they represent a discontinuity of something. If not a discontinuity of space itself, then perhaps a discontinuity in derivatives of something.
     
  21. Aug 2, 2004 #20
    Pearls and Chains From the Planck Epoch

    There are reasons why I am reproducing this thread here, which I will explain shortly.

    One would have to know how the string would extent from the planck Epoch and bubble, to the string amplitudes of differing energy values. For such string to extend through and orignate from the first phase of the Planck Epoch, one would have to undertsand how these strings can extend through the differnet states to today, fifteen billion years later.


    http://viswiz.imk.fraunhofer.de/~nikitin/ax_3.gif



     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2004
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: What is the graviton? Please place your definitions
  1. Gravitons ? (Replies: 18)

Loading...