Timeline for How is it possible for a graviton to drag time frames and dilate time?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 3, 2020 at 13:14 | comment | added | anna v | You are absolutely wrong, What is your level of studies of physics? There is not one unified theory of physics at the moment, there are physics mathematical models for specific phase space regions that are consistent in the overlap phase space . | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 12:32 | comment | added | user32023 | You're trying to argue that you can use GR when you need something to explain the dilation of time, but you don't need GR to explain why massive bodies are attracted to each other. For the last time, you're the one mixing your frameworks. I'm arguing that you can't have it both ways and that if you pick QFT, you can't explain time dilation. | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 12:14 | comment | added | anna v | This is the last time: mixing mathematical frameworks creates the confusion. Theorsists have the mathematics for when frameworks overlap to have consistency, otherwise one of the models is rejected. QFT is at the microcosm. GR is for large masses and velocities. In the overlap, consistency can be found, but the vocabulary of "attraction" does not belong to QFT , one uses "interactions". , "attraction belongs to the newtonian framework, which is at the limit of GR and consistent. I am not saying both I am saying each in its phasespace of variables. | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 11:57 | comment | added | user32023 | You are the one mixing the frameworks. This is an incontrovertible fact: you can't say that both GR and QFT provide the attraction between two objects with mass. Pick one. If you pick GR, then you can explain time dilation through the warping of spacetime. If you pick QFT, then you can explain the attraction, but you can't explain the time dilation. You don't have the option of saying both provide the attraction. | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 11:54 | comment | added | anna v | . No problem. Forces have no meaning in general relativity. . In the phase space where galilean relativity applies , forces are emergent from the mathematics of general relativity in flat spaces. You have to learn not to mix up mathematical frameworks. | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 11:53 | comment | added | anna v | @Quarkly you keep mixing up frameworks. The graviton was almost detected by the BICEP2 experiment, except that the effect they measured in the polarization of the gravitational waves could not be separated from the dust in the empty spaces. arxiv.org/abs/1707.06755 . During the time the astrophysics community was accepting the premises of the first publication there was absolutely no problem with general relativity. As electromagnetic waves emerge from a superposition of photons, so will gravitational waves emerge from a superposition of gravitons | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 11:47 | comment | added | user32023 | No! Your answer is logically absurd. If the graviton is found tomorrow, then GR is disproven. All it's implications go away. You can't say that both GR and the graviton provide the attractive force between massive bodies; it's one or the other. If the graviton provides the attractive force, then there is no theory here that distorts time unless that's some property provided by the graviton. That's the obvious implications here. | |
| Apr 3, 2020 at 4:24 | history | answered | anna v | CC BY-SA 4.0 |