Timeline for Is it possible that there is no theory of quantum gravity? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Jan 29, 2020 at 13:53 | history | suggested | BlackHoleSlice | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
basic spelling and pronoun correction
|
| Jan 29, 2020 at 12:40 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Jan 29, 2020 at 13:53 | |||||
| Feb 26, 2014 at 17:00 | history | closed |
Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir Brandon Enright John Rennie Kyle Kanos tpg2114 |
Opinion-based | |
| Feb 26, 2014 at 3:01 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 26, 2014 at 17:00 | |||||
| Feb 22, 2014 at 19:13 | answer | added | lvella | timeline score: 1 | |
| Feb 22, 2014 at 18:35 | comment | added | lvella | @MitchellPorter This is nice! What I was looking for... This Wikipedia article says: "such models typically predict huge cosmological constants". Isn't that what was shown by recent observations, that says the universe is at accelerated expansion? | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 20:40 | comment | added | Mitchell Porter | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_gravity | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 16:24 | comment | added | jinawee | No. There the is no barrier between classical and quantum mechanics, as there is no barrier between classical mechanics and special relativity (with some minor subtleties). | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 16:08 | history | edited | Abhimanyu Pallavi Sudhir | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
|
| Feb 21, 2014 at 16:03 | review | Close votes | |||
| Feb 21, 2014 at 16:08 | |||||
| Feb 21, 2014 at 15:53 | comment | added | lvella | I'd say more of desinformation. @jinawee are you talking about the effects of quantum fluctuation on early universe, before inflation, that accounts for assimetry and structure on the current universe? | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 15:48 | comment | added | Dilaton | This post is primarly personal opinion instead of knowledge based. | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 14:51 | comment | added | jinawee | it seems that the equations won't renormalize I think that String Theory solves that problem. Lubos are you there? every book about the subject traces a stron distinction between "quantum level" and "classical level" that seems a wrong view, we're being able to observe quantum effects at larger scales than before. | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 14:38 | comment | added | user26143 | (1) non-renormailzable theory is not useless, it is a low-energy effective theory. In a broder sense, gravity and SM are already unified below the Planck scale; (2) by the COW experiment, we could predict and vertify the effect of gravity in quantum mechanics at low-energy; (3) what we are missing is a theory capable at arbitary energy scale, if there is no such theory, it is contradict with the logic of QFT (Landau pole, renormalization, etc), it implies we do not have a logical consistency theory anyway | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 14:27 | comment | added | David H | What if there is no quantum gravity? 50 years of string theory goes down the toilet, that's what. | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 14:21 | answer | added | anna v | timeline score: 3 | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 13:41 | comment | added | Kyle Kanos | I don't know that there are any theorists in any branch of physics who are actively trying to disprove a theory. | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 13:40 | answer | added | Slereah | timeline score: 4 | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 13:28 | comment | added | Hydro Guy | "Finally, at least two sources I have seen states that Einstein's General Relativity is the most well veryfied thoery of all physics, because of something related to pulsars." I believe that your sources meant to say that GR is the most well verified theory for $\textbf{gravitation}$ that we have now. If we just see in pure figures, I believe that QED is the most well verified one. | |
| Feb 21, 2014 at 13:25 | history | asked | lvella | CC BY-SA 3.0 |