ydoaPs Posted June 17, 2005 Posted June 17, 2005 say mass doesn't directly bend spacetime. say the graviton is what actually bends spacetime. massive particles just emit gravitons. the farther the gravitons get from the source, the more spread out they are, therefore the force is weaker (which makes sense, with the inverse-square law). gravitons don't need to be absorbed, they just are emmitted. i am guessing the mass would determine the graviton emmission rate. i wouldn't even know how to start making equations to compare to gr. i don't even know how to do tensor calculus, so i couldn't compare with gr if i had the equations. there is probably some qm stuff that i need to factor in. this is just a base idea for now. in the diagram, there are two objects with different masses. the green lines are graviton paths.
5614 Posted June 18, 2005 Posted June 18, 2005 Gravitons could/would be absorbed because otherwise gravity would become stronger over time as more and more gravitons come into existence, also that would be how they interact. Obviously QG (quantum gravity) isn't a real theory yet as there's, so far, no solid proof, although for a "theory" which doesn't exist its quite popular!
ydoaPs Posted June 18, 2005 Author Posted June 18, 2005 if you look at the sun, does it get brighter? it continually emits photons.
5614 Posted June 18, 2005 Posted June 18, 2005 That's not what I meant... if gravitons were continually emitted and never absorbed then originally there were no gravitons (before big bang) then there would have been the first ever graviton... then the second... the universe would be continually "filling up" with gravitons.
DQW Posted June 19, 2005 Posted June 19, 2005 Please look up "exchange particles"... and note the use of the word 'exchange'.
ydoaPs Posted June 19, 2005 Author Posted June 19, 2005 gravitons don't have to "exchange" for gravity to work.
5614 Posted June 19, 2005 Posted June 19, 2005 So the QG theory which is not yet certain in any way is certainly working in this way? Every other force; Strong/weak/EM have exchange particles, the quantization of gravity is supposed to work in the same way as the other forces.... ie. a carrier particle which is an exchange particle.
ydoaPs Posted June 19, 2005 Author Posted June 19, 2005 yes. in this model-under-production, gravitons don't act on matter, they act on space.
DQW Posted June 19, 2005 Posted June 19, 2005 gravitons don't have to "exchange" for gravity to work.If by "for gravity to work" you mean "for a pair of particles to influence each other's state" (described by a Lagrangian, say), then I'm not sure how your statement can be true. However, this is not something I'm terribly familiar with, other than knowing that QG was itself abandoned because it was not renormalizable. I think higher than second order corrections led to divergences that no one could make go away (at least, not until LQG came along). In any case, I think QG was abandoned when string theories came along that would be renormalizable, and they predicted a spin 2 massless boson ! Now, however, LQG seems to be quite hot.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now