Does accumulation of gravitational radiation increase quantity of meters in space?

[DimaMazin]

If gravitational radiation is traveling, then in space is more and more the meetting gravitational radiation. Does it increase quantity of meters of the space?

[Strange]

18 minutes ago, DimaMazin said:

If gravitational radiation is traveling, then in space is more and more the meetting gravitational radiation. Does it increase quantity of meters of the space?

Gravitational waves cause alternate stretching and squeezing in directions at right angles to the direction of travel. It causes no permanent change to the space it passes through - in the same way that a ripple on a pond leaves the water level the same after it passes. 

[DimaMazin]

11 minutes ago, Strange said:

Gravitational waves cause alternate stretching and squeezing in directions at right angles to the direction of travel. It causes no permanent change to the space it passes through - in the same way that a ripple on a pond leaves the water level the same after it passes. 

Density of space around of mass isn't caused by gravitational radiation? 

[Strange]

1 hour ago, DimaMazin said:

Density of space around of mass isn't caused by gravitational radiation? 

I don’t know what you mean by “density of space” (it seems to be a meaningless phrase). 

Gravitational waves are generated by certain types of asymmetrical systems, such as two bodies orbiting one another. 

They are not generated by a stationary mass. 

[DimaMazin]

8 hours ago, Strange said:

I don’t know what you mean by “density of space” (it seems to be a meaningless phrase). 

Gravitational waves are generated by certain types of asymmetrical systems, such as two bodies orbiting one another. 

They are not generated by a stationary mass. 

Can spacetime exist without gravitational particles? Does mass lose itself for support of spacetime (or gravitational field) ?

[beecee]

5 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

Can spacetime exist without gravitational particles? Does mass lose itself for support of spacetime (or gravitational field) ?

The following site has a reputation for proper scientific answers by reputable scientific folk. I was originally linked to it by an Astronomer on a now defunct forum,

Q: Can space-time exist without matter?

So, let's make a single brave assumption, which we need to get any further.

Brave assumption: For questions about possibility: the "can x situation exist" questions, we should look to see whether the current best theory in physics admits situation x as a solution.  If it is a solution, the answer is yes; if not, no.

Right: so can space-time exist without matter?

According to our best theory of space-time: yes.  Our best theory of space-time is general relativity, and this admits solutions without matter.  The Minkowski metric is the simplest: flat space-time with no matter at all.

But wait a minute, what about our best theory of matter?  This is a variety of quantum field theory.  And according to this theory, there is no such thing as no matter.  "Empty" space is a seething mass of fields, with virtual particles popping in and out of existence.  So according to this theory: no.  There is no space-time without matter, because there is never no matter.

So... they disagree.  What's the real answer?  Well, it depends which theory you think will retain its form when the two are unified.  At the moment, leading theories of quantum gravity take more from QFT than from GR, so you'd expect the "no" answer to be the one to survive in the future.  But physics has a history of surprising us.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In practise, it already has. The constituents of the earliest BB model were a sort of 'energy soup', too hot to permit 'matter' to exist.

However, once this 'soup' cooled - then 'matter' appeared.

Don't forget that energy and matter are a different expression of the same thing.

 

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Does a falling tree in the forest make a noise if there is nobody who can hear it?

In our space-time particles apparently continuously pop into and out of existence, so even a vacuum needs matter. 
And if there is no matter, and there is therefore no state of matter, then it would be impossible to measure the progress of time and position.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Space-time is an abstract. So insofar as an abstract "exists"....no. Without matter and hence change, space-time would have nothing to reference.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

My preferred answer is as follows.....

Can space exist by itself without matter or energy around?

https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/a11332.html

No. Experiments continue to show that there is no 'space' that stands apart from space-time itself...no arena in which matter, energy and gravity operate which is not affected by matter, energy and gravity. General relativity tells us that what we call space is just another feature of the gravitational field of the universe, so space and space-time do not exist apart from the matter and energy that creates the gravitational field. This is not speculation, but sound observation.

NB: The "do not exist"  I have highlighted is in the actual link as "can and do not exist" Obviously confused by that I E-Mailed Sten Odenwald, the physicst/Astronomer responsible for the answers and he apologised to me and said it was simply a typographical error and should be "do not exist"

 

Staff edit: above taken from https://www.quora.com/Can-space-time-exist-without-matter

[Strange]

2 hours ago, DimaMazin said:

Can spacetime exist without gravitational particles? Does mass lose itself for support of spacetime (or gravitational field) ?

We have no evidence for, or theory of, “gravitational particles” (if by that you mean graviton). GR is a classical theory; ie not quantised. 

Mass isn’t lost to the gravitational field. Just like charge isn’t lost because it creates an electric field. 

[MigL]

Differing definitions BeeCee...

In relativity there is no background stage on which events take place. Space-time is simply a co-ordinate system, and, as such, it can be an empty co-ordinate system.

Quantum field theory does make use of a background stage, which is by definition, filled with fields. So an empty space-time is meaningless in QFT.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

beecee, it would be appreciated if you could include citations if you are going to directly quote material written by others. I have added a link to your post. 

 

[beecee]

6 hours ago, hypervalent_iodine said:

!

Moderator Note

beecee, it would be appreciated if you could include citations if you are going to directly quote material written by others. I have added a link to your post. 

 

My apologies...It was accidentley left out.

[DimaMazin]

16 hours ago, Strange said:

We have no evidence for, or theory of, “gravitational particles” (if by that you mean graviton). GR is a classical theory; ie not quantised. 

Mass isn’t lost to the gravitational field. Just like charge isn’t lost because it creates an electric field. 

Thanks for your answers.