0
2

[–] juicedidwtc 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

gravitons aren't real

0
2

[–] The_Cat [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

This experiment will give a hint towards whether that's true or not.

0
0

[–] NeckerFaggot 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

How have they isolated the eletromagnetic component of the diamonds from interacting? Is this why it is super cold?

How do they know that the diamonds have fallen enough? What if gravity has thermal time, that takes the span of the universe to correlate? Ex. the non-perturbative quantum effects take place during another phase of spacetime.

0
0

[–] GoodGodKirk 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I don’t know, gravity requires weight, and quantum mechanics might have atomic weights.

0
1

[–] juicedidwtc 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

mass not weight, and quantum objects of course have mass, that is not the problem with unifying general relativity and quantum mechanics. The problem is that general relativity only works if you make the assumption that spacetine can be stretched or compressed infinitely and that contradicts what you see in quantum mechanics where everything can be broken down into small indivisible units. Eventually you reach the size of those units, and then how do you compress space any more from there?

Additionally trying to unify general relativity with quantum mechanics leads to the black hole information paradox, but I dont really see that as a problem with grand unification, because I personally find the holographic principle to be a very likely theory that would explain away that problem.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] GoodGodKirk 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Wouldn’t gravity allow for the stretching you’re discussing? If gravity stretches, then the item can compress again, giving an infinite amount of compressions, as long as gravity can be applied.

And the article states that gravity can’t be measured, yet we use the gravity around stars as a lens to see further into the distance, or we use the refraction of light warped by black holes to actually see the black holes...why is it that we can’t measure gravity? Or is it that we’re looking for the gravity element? I got a little confused there at the end and was wrapping my head around it.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
2

[–] The_Cat [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Discrete space breaks Lorentz symmetry, so that's a major problem.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] juicedidwtc 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

If it was found that lorentz symmetry, like entropy, is just an emergent property at the macroscopic level, would it actually invalidate anything about general relativity? It seems to me that einstein's equivalence principal is really the only thing that needs to hold true all the way down.

edit: disregard, I see now what happens if you try to do a lorentz transormation on something the size of a plank length.