0
$\begingroup$

I have checked at these below:

Is matter a continuous part of the field of space-time?

Is spacetime all that exists?

What I could understand is that particles are different kinds of local fluctuation states of force fields. Particles make up matter. So matter is part of various force fields. Is that correct?

The metric of spacetime is the gravitational field. So is it correct to say gravitational field is part of spacetime? What about other force fields? We have various force fields like electromagnetic field, gluon field, higgs field,etc. Do these fields lie on top of the spacetime (but separate from it) or are they too a part of the spacetime?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

What I could understand is that particles are different kinds of local fluctuation states of force fields.

Particles are specific kinds of states (a certain asymptotic states defined according to the LSZ formalism) of the quantum fields--they do not necessarily correspond to the states of force fields. For example, the electromagnetic field is what can be called the "force field" responsible for mediating electromagnetic forces between electrically charged particles. And photons are the particle states corresponding to this field. But, electrons are also particle states of a quantum field, called the electron field. And the electron field is not responsible for mediating any force between any particles. Such fields are often called matter fields.

Particles make up matter. So matter is part of various force fields. Is that correct?

This is a bit of an oversimplification to say that particles make up matter. For example, the electron in an atom is not in a particle state. The key thing is that a quantum field has many physical states which are not necessarily particle states. Especially, if one is talking about strongly interacting fields such as the quark fields, there is no meaningful way in which one can talk of a "quark particle". However, it is correct that matter corresponds to states of various quantum fields--even if it is not made up of particles. Again, all quantum fields are not force fields. There are also the so-called matter fields such as the quantum field corresponding to the electron.

The metric of spacetime is the gravitational field. So is it correct to say gravitational field is part of spacetime?

Yes, this is essentially correct. Gravitation is a manifestation of the intrinsic dynamical structure of the spacetime itself. However, notice that we do not have a quantum theory of gravity. And our notion of spacetime and gravity is likely to be massively revised at a conceptual level when we understand a full quantum theory of gravity.

What about other force fields? We have various force fields like electromagnetic field, gluon field, higgs field,etc. Do these fields lie on top of the spacetime (but separate from it) or are they too a part of the spacetime?

No, such fields are additional structure on top of the intrinsic structure that spacetime has. Of course, they live on a spacetime manifold, i.e., a quantum field is simply a field of operators--one at each point in spacetime. But, the operator is an additional structure on top of spacetime.

However, let me mention an interesting point. In theories involving extra dimensions, such as the Kaluza-Klein theory, fields such as the electromagnetic field are not added on top of the basic geometrical structure of spacetime. Rather, they simply arise out of the geometric structure of spacetime--just like gravity does in general relativity.

Hope this helps! :)

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

In the kind of particle physics that is widely accepted, such as the Standard Model, quantum fields for quarks, charged leptons, neutrinos, photons, weak bosons, gluons, and Higgs exist in spacetime but are not part of the geometry of spacetime. Only gravitation currently has an accepted geometrical explanation. The electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces do not.

In more speculative physics, the other three forces can be related to the geometry of possible higher dimensions, but there is no evidence for this.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ "quantum fields for quarks, charged leptons, neutrinos, photons, weak bosons, gluons, and Higgs exist in spacetime but are not part of the geometry of spacetime. Only gravitation currently has an accepted geometrical explanation. The electromagnetic, weak, and strong forces do not." Can you please elaborate on that? Do you mean that we usually say that gravity curves spacetime, because all particles interact with the gravitational field, and all these particles will have an altered trajectory? The EM field does not have this, because only EM charged particles will have an altered trajectory? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 24, 2019 at 0:52
  • $\begingroup$ @ÁrpádSzendrei That’s a reasonable way to look at it. But what I meant is that gravity is completely described by the metric tensor, which represents the geometry of spacetime. Other forces and particles are described by quantum fields which exist in spacetime and affect spacetime geometry through their energy and momentum but don’t represent that geometry. $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Commented Oct 24, 2019 at 1:57
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you so you say that gravity has no such quantum field description right (no accepted quantum gravity, just effective quantum gravity calculations) right? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 24, 2019 at 2:05
  • $\begingroup$ There is no accepted theory of quantum gravity. I’m not sure what you mean by effective quantum gravity. $\endgroup$
    – G. Smith
    Commented Oct 24, 2019 at 2:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.