What is the rationale behind gravitons?

  • Thread starter Eelco
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Gravitons
In summary, the rationale behind gravitons is based on the success of QED and QCD in describing electromagnetic and weak and strong interactions. A particle explanation is favored due to this success, but a geometrical explanation could also be aesthetically pleasing. Gravitons were speculated as a way to associate a particle to the spin-2 wave in linearized gravity. However, there are some criticisms of the existence of gravitons, such as their inability to be directly detected and the difficulty in formulating a physically realistic theory based on them. Non-relativistic calculations can be done with gravitons, but their existence as a physical entity is still debated.
  • #71
fleem said:
We know that energy stored in a gravitational system can be converted to energy stored in other kinds of systems. all those other kinds of systems require that energy be quantized. If energy in a gravitational system were not quantized, then how could it smoothly flow into another type of system which accepted energy in packets? So this is why gravitational energy must be quantized.
Yup, that makes sense to me.

Yet in general, I don't think it is a good thing to get too hung up on things like invariants, or even conservation laws. Yeah, they seem to hold. As far as we can tell, which is only to limited resolution.

If your model can explain all observations, it is good to me. To convince me it can, you need to actually compute stuff with it, and compare it side by side with observations. To me, juggeling mathematical theorems is a means to an end, not a goal in itself.

SR and GR, space-time, continuums, manifolds, dimensions, and Newtonian mechanics are descriptions of the large-scale behavior of many individual machines (particle interactions). You are right, there is no reasonable merging with the behavior of individual particle interactions for any of those large-scale theories. Scientists continue to erroneously presume theories developed solely to describe the average behavior of many simple machines will also be the founding theories in describing the behavior of each of those machines. There is no reason to believe that.

Yeah, we completely agree here.
 

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
18
Views
7K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
34
Views
4K
Back
Top