ydoaPs Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 it occurs to me that since gravitons are particles, they must also act like a wave. with that in mind, shouldn't there be an interference pattern? isn't that an easy way to proof the existance of gravitons? if there is an interference pattern, they exist, if not, then they don't. there must be something wrong with this or it would have already been done. whats up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted May 7, 2005 Share Posted May 7, 2005 To detect the interference pattern of gravitons you must be able to detect gravitons. If you can detect gravitons you´ve allready proven them. For large ammounts of gravitons you´d also need them to be coherent. I don´t think anyone would know how to construct a "gravitaional laser". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 you wouldn't need to detect them, you would just need to detect their infulence(gravity) which we can do. if gravitons exist, there should be a predictable gravatational flux, shouldn't there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 That´s why I added the 2nd sentence to my answer: You must have a large ammount of coherent gravitons. Probably a really really large ammount if you want to do measurements with say pendulums or lasers. Afaik, not even normal (the non-quantized ones of General Relativity) gravitational waves have been detected so far (but there are several currently running or upcoming experiments trying to do so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 why would they have to be coherant? wouldn't that mess with the interference pattern? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 Not sure if I completely understand that question plus it´s quite some time since I did interference experiments but if I remember correctly some coherence is a nessecity for an interference pattern. Another interesting question would of course be how you want to create an interference pattern with gravitons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 a massive object emits gravitons which interfere with other gravitons greating areas of strong/weak gravitational force as compared to the inverse-square law. shouldn't that difference be predictable and measurable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timo Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 To me it sounds like trying to get an interference pattern of two suns´ photons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 one source, several gravitons. caclulate the pattern of interference, then measure in several places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 it occurs to me that since gravitons are particles' date=' they must also act like a wave. with that in mind, shouldn't there be an interference pattern? isn't that an easy way to proof the existance of gravitons? if there is an interference pattern, they exist, if not, then they don't. there must be something wrong with this or it would have already been done. whats up?[/quote'] We need an experiment/set-up. I think a good test would be a 2 slit experiment. How do you set-up the "opaque to gravity" wall? (the two slits allowing the normal graviton flow or communication which initiates the interference) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 that may be the answer to my question right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPL.Luke Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 isn't it true that there's nothing that can shield gravity thus a two slit experiment could not be carried out. furthermore how would you detect where the gravitons are hitting (in order to see the iterference pattern) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 8, 2005 Author Share Posted May 8, 2005 you wouldn't need to detect the particles, just gravity. gravity isn't understood enough to know if it is possible to be shielded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 8, 2005 Share Posted May 8, 2005 you wouldn't need to detect the particles, just gravity. gravity isn't understood enough to know if it is possible to be shielded. And as we don't know how to shield them (if it is even possible), we can't do this experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 9, 2005 Author Share Posted May 9, 2005 i remember a problem in fizzicks class in which there were two speakers and we had to calculate where they canceled each other out. could the same principle apply here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daecon Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 What about binary star systems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHole Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 If gravity has something to do with vacuum energy, then i don't think it can be shielded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevermore Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 cern has detected gravitons in a particle accelerater Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 cern has detected gravitons in a particle accelerater Cite, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 9, 2005 Author Share Posted May 9, 2005 Cite, please. my thoughts exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHole Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 AFAIK gravitons have never been confirmed to exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted May 9, 2005 Share Posted May 9, 2005 That is also my knowledge. And the speaker idea using stars instead, we'd have to get probes out to starts to search where we calculate the interfearence patterns should be, and also forgive me if my memory serves me incorectly but don't the sources have to be coherent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 9, 2005 Author Share Posted May 9, 2005 what about the two replacing two speakers with say two black holes and doin gthe interfernce that way? you don't neccesarily have to send a probe you can use a telescope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPL.Luke Posted May 10, 2005 Share Posted May 10, 2005 or just put probes between the earth and moon, there are places where the gravity of the earth and the moon cancel eachother out but that is simple classical mechanics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ydoaPs Posted May 10, 2005 Author Share Posted May 10, 2005 lagrange points? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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