2
$\begingroup$

I read here http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130709115344.htm that Prof. Lewandowski's work suggests that different particles may experience different spacetimes. His work is in the context of Loop Quantum Gravity. Sadly there is no reference to the original paper. Can anyone provide it?

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I know nothing about these models, but a bit of searching turn's up Lewandowski's arxiv page, research gate page and a preprint of the article that this piece seems to be about. $\endgroup$ – Michael Brown Jul 10 '13 at 13:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Nivalth: it is not just about the inconsistency and indefensibility of LQG. It is about the utterly irrational and biased approach that its decided champions that includes you pursue. How can you possibly study some bizarre, non-elementary, derived, speculative conclusion of LQG before you study LQG itself? Don't you realize that you can't possibly end up with anything else than gibberish? You should start to study LQG as a theory first. If you do it right, you will understand why it's inconsistent. If you can't quite do it, fine, you may "study" the claim by Lewandowski later. $\endgroup$ – Luboš Motl Jul 10 '13 at 14:14
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @LubošMotl I've removed the flamebait paragraph. $\endgroup$ – Michael Brown Jul 10 '13 at 14:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Dear @Nivalth, this more general question would be more appropriate. The article is a hype ignited by the fact that the paper got to a journal. But it is a 2-citation preprint after half a year, so it's fair to say that it hasn't excited even the loop quantum gravity community. All the interpretations in the media (and even in the paper) are loaded. What they have found is that the Lorentz symmetry is broken in LQG/LQCosmology even if one tries to assume it is preserved, and the dispersion relations are modified as a function of velocity etc. $\endgroup$ – Luboš Motl Jul 11 '13 at 9:45
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Nivalth, I made an edit to the question that I think should remove the problems people had with it that were causing them to cast close votes. Feel free to revert the edit if you like, but do note that a few people thought the question in its old form was not sufficiently clear, and I'm inclined to agree with them. $\endgroup$ – David Z Jul 12 '13 at 6:44

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.