Talk:Quantum gravity/Archive for 2006

Gravity

My perception is that gravity is simply the following.

I treat the whole universe as a closed system consisting of two basic Quantum’s that facilitate Gravity.

One Quantum is all the Mass or Energy The other is Time.

If work or change is necessary and the system is to remain at an equilibrium state, one quantum must divide and avail itself to the other quantum “Time”

Time must therefore accrue.

Now if all Mass sheds to Time and Time accrues this quantum of Mass, it’s increasing quantum applies its force of quantum onto all mass including its own quantum of mass and all respective fields or surfaces, it is important to keep in mind Times Quantum or mass is subject to times original quantum of force.

If two fields of charges or mass are close to each other they are forced together because the force is not as effective between them by Times quantum.

Why don’t we see this shrinking? Well we can if we look beyond our local area of mass to where the shedding to time is at a different rate via Redshift and the fact the universe seems to be expanding and at an increasing rate as it should.

of course I could be wrong about Time being the increasing quantum and Dark matter could be the quantum?

== Theories == I understand that HEIM THEORY (hereinafter "HT") is not considered mainstream, but it at least makes as much sense as "process theory." In addition HT has a formula derived from first principles that predicts particle masses. Like LQG, it is a canonical theory that quantizes space time and winds up with a minimum slice of space-time. It just does the quantization in a different way. It has a Wikipedia article, so i propose it should be added under theories. Take Care.--Will314159 21:56, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

quantum gravity as causal force of big bang

somehow, this point seems to be missed.

the very definition of quantum gravity here seems to have missed the point. Quantum gravity is that force which was very similar to gravity which drove the initial expansion of the universe. Most theorists believe Quantum gravity quit being an active force in the universe somewhere in the plank epoch (This last i am not sure of.)

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2006/4/15/3602

http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v65/i4/e043508

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9510063

This turns out to be almost, but not quite, what the situation is. Quantum gravity refers to the behavior of gravity at length and energy scales where quantum effects are expected to play a major role in its behavior (point masses close to the Planck mass, temperatures where particles have energy close to the Planck energy, and so forth). In the early universe, this is expected to have occurred during the Planck epoch (when the universe was compact and dense enough to be close to the Planck temperature). Nowadays, it's expected that quantum gravity effects will be significant in any complete description of black holes. Some proposed versions of quantum gravity also quantize spacetime in a way that is expected to have noticeable effects on light that propagates an extremely long distance (such as light from galaxies formed very early in the universe's history).

As far as the Big Bang is concerned, what theorists actually tend to say is that our models of what happens are only valid after quantum gravity ceases being important, and also after gravity ceases to be unified with the other fundamental forces. This is expected to be after the Planck epoch, though some unification theories propose that gravity unifies with the other forces at lower temperatures. What effect quantum gravity had on how the universe behaved prior to the threshold time is simply unknown, though most physicists believe that it prevents singularities from occurring in the description. --Christopher Thomas 21:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Tad misleading use of "vacuum"

I don't expect most highschool freshmen that try reading this page to understand the actual meaning of the word "vacuum" when used in this manner -> "In particular, the vacuum, when it exists, is shown to depend on the path of the observer through space-time (see Unruh effect)." Of course, further studying the Unruh effect will explain the matter conveniently, but my personal opinion is that including the modern definition of vacuum in this paragraph shouldn't be too difficult. As I don't want to mess with the article and cause any outrage by simply doing as I like, I'll leave it for others to judge convenient or not. :) 213.161.190.228 07:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC) Henning

Leprechaun???

In Historical Perspective section there is a phrase:

(P.S. and a leprechaun).

What is it? Is it a joke?

--213.142.209.184 11:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Mendel Sachs' work

I would like to request that an expert discuss Mendel Sachs' (physicist at SUNY) work -- that is, discuss his quaternion formulation of GR that reduces to QM in the linear, flat-space approximation. From the point of view of this perplexed graduate student of physics, Sachs' theory shows remarkable promise, and yet his work is by and large overlooked by the physics community. He has written a number of books on his theory, and as far as I can tell is a highly regarded physicist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.236.162 (talk) on 03:37, 9 April 2006 (UTC)