Which way is up?

[StringJunky]

16 minutes ago, interested said:

Please expand

I know and it is complete conjecture, but why can the Casimir effect not be used to prove the existence of virtual gravitons.

Strange answered.

[Strange]

22 minutes ago, interested said:

I know and it is complete conjecture, but why can the Casimir effect not be used to prove the existence of virtual gravitons.

Because it is caused by the electromagnetic field.

(I suspect that the wavelength of gravitons would be many times larger, anyway.)

[interested]

10 hours ago, Strange said:

Because it is caused by the electromagnetic field.

(I suspect that the wavelength of gravitons would be many times larger, anyway.)

Thanks again for the clarification. 

[swansont]

On March 12, 2018 at 2:47 PM, interested said:

 Is there any proof gravitons virtual or otherwise exist, have they ever been detected. 

No, they haven't.

Quote

Mordred wrote the mantra all things are quantum fluctuations and or excitations, could he be right, or have I been mislead.

You've been told multiple times that you have misinterpreted this.

On March 12, 2018 at 6:15 PM, interested said:

 I know and it is complete conjecture, but why can the Casimir effect not be used to prove the existence of virtual gravitons.

This has been answered. Maybe you could ask in a way that acknowledges this. If I just repeat the answer, is that going to help?

"The Casimir force does not involve gravity; the solution to it is from electromagnetic boundary conditions. i.e. You are restricting photon modes."

There is a component of the electric field that must be zero at the surface of a conductor. This is what drives the solution to the Casimir force, by excluding certain electromagnetic modes from the cavity. The absence of these modes creates the force from the vacuum.

There is no corresponding boundary condition for gravity, thus there would be no way to exclude gravitational modes. There is no way to shield gravity.

[interested]

10 hours ago, swansont said:

No, they haven't.

Correct

10 hours ago, swansont said:

There is no corresponding boundary condition for gravity, thus there would be no way to exclude gravitational modes. There is no way to shield gravity.

What causes gravity at the quantum level? Gravitons, Quantum fuctuations, fairies perhaps.

Gravitons like fairies have never been detected leaving only quantum fluctuations which have been detected

Edited March 13, 2018 by interested

[swansont]

2 hours ago, interested said:

Correct

What causes gravity at the quantum level? Gravitons, Quantum fuctuations, fairies perhaps.

We don't have a complete theory yet.

2 hours ago, interested said:

Gravitons like fairies have never been detected leaving only quantum fluctuations which have been detected

That's not how science works. Protons, neutrons, electrons, and neutrinos all existed before we were able to detect them. The discovery of the electron did not mean neutrons were actually electrons.

[Janus]

3 hours ago, interested said:

Correct

What causes gravity at the quantum level? Gravitons, Quantum fuctuations, fairies perhaps.

Gravitons like fairies have never been detected leaving only quantum fluctuations which have been detected

Neutrinos were hypothesized before they were ever detected, but we had detected other particles such as electrons, protons and neutrons.  This did not mean that neutrinos were likely to turn out to be one of these particles. The very reason they were hypothesized was the fact that none of these particle had the properties that the neutrino needed to have.

In the same way, quantum fluctuations do not behave in a manner the is consistent with them fulfilling the role of the hypothesized gravtion. 

[Strange]

11 hours ago, interested said:

Gravitons like fairies have never been detected leaving only quantum fluctuations which have been detected

By this “logic” one can say that yetis, like fairies, have never been detected but ichthyosaurs have, therefore yetis are ichthyosaurs. 

[interested]

8 hours ago, Janus said:

Neutrinos were hypothesized before they were ever detected, but we had detected other particles such as electrons, protons and neutrons.  This did not mean that neutrinos were likely to turn out to be one of these particles. The very reason they were hypothesized was the fact that none of these particle had the properties that the neutrino needed to have.

In the same way, quantum fluctuations do not behave in a manner the is consistent with them fulfilling the role of the hypothesized gravtion. 

Yes I know, like the Higgs boson it took a long time to detect it. But like Swansont says above there is not a complete theory yet. I have read a number of theories on this forum and on the internet that indicate quantum foam might be the cause of gravity and dark energy, others indicate it might something to do with entanglement, until there is a definitive answer I do not think there is any harm in at least thinking about or speculating about the subject.

I think this is better discussed on the speculations thread, the OP of this thread I think has been answered in sufficient detail, (for me at least) thank you ALL for your input.

[tmx3]

Any way is up, as long as it’s not down.