9 ms·

Just curious but why?

by markus_zhang 5y ago

onceiwasthere 5y ago
They want an exciting disruption to current theory.
- BurningFrog 5y ago
  Basically they're bored/want mysteries to solve.
  - zeven7 5y ago
    tbf, there is already a mystery to solve. This just means we have no new information to help us solve it.
  - ohgodplsno 5y ago
    We're kind of at a dead end between both leading theories. A counterexample to either of them would mean that we got it wrong somewhere, and might help us figure out where, potentially unlocking more later. You wouldn't be surprised if your door opened just as usual when you put your key in the lock. The day it starts jamming however, you get very interested.
- GuB-42 5y ago
  Side note: Einstein didn't believe in black holes, at least initially. Black holes are a solution to the general relativity equations, but Einstein thought they were just a mathematical quirk, and that in real life, they wouldn't have been able to form. So ever time someone says "Einstein was right" when talking about black holes, then no. He was right about general relativity, but he was wrong about the existence of black holes.
_joel 5y ago
Many papers/authors postulating something different to what Einstein did?
adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
GR and quantum field theory don't work together, so at least one of them is wrong, and it would be good to figure out which and how.
- jeremyjh 5y ago
  Why would that matter at this scale ?
  - dotnet00 5y ago
    Black holes are extreme enough to be one of the places where both can matter.
    - jeremyjh 5y ago
      Scale was not the right word - maybe I meant distance or resolution. Does QM make a prediction that could be falsified at this resolution?
- markus_zhang 5y ago
  Thanks. Can you please point me to some popular science article that explains why the two do not agree with each other?
  - boschnix 5y ago
    I liked Sean Carroll's take on this with Steven Strogatz in the recent episode of Joy of Why. https://www.quantamagazine.org/where-do-space-time-and-gravity-come-from-20220504/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/where-do-space-time-and-gravi...
  - rootbear 5y ago
    Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" does a very good, completely non-technical, job of explaining the conflict between the two theories. It then goes on to explain why String Theory is one possible solution to the problem.
kuekacang 5y ago
Sometimes physicists like the theories--especially the battle-tested ones--proven wrong so that those theories needs to be refined or reevaluated. Something related to the joy of problem solving.
mabbo 5y ago
Quantum Physics and General Relativity make different predictions in specific circumstances which are beyond our ability to test to figure out which one is wrong. They can't both be perfectly correct. But in every test we can make, both seem to model reality really well. The best place to look for new data where we might find reality disagreeing with either model is in the extreme parts of the universe, like black holes. If there was even a hint in this photo that General Relativity wasn't perfectly accurate, we might be able to take the discrepancy and build a new model that solves the disagreement. Whoever does that gets a Nobel Prize and has their name as immortalized as "Einstein".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- zeven7 5y ago
  Relatedly, before general relativity, people already knew something was wrong with Newton's theory of gravity from observing the orbit of Mercury, which didn't follow the theory accurately. At that time Mercury, being so close to the Sun, was an extreme condition that showed the flaws in the theory. The fact that general relativity continues to hold up to every observation we can make is remarkable.
  - albrewer 5y ago
    I'd be willing to bet that the discrepancy is something that we generally consider invariant but in reality should be a ratio between two things that are very large, but get bigger or smaller at _slightly_ different rates depending on the scale or distances you're working with. Granted, I only ever got as far as E&M physics in college so I could be way off here but that scenario has turned up so many times in history.
  - lordnacho 5y ago
    Could it happen that the universe simply never provides us with the required evidence? Eg if there's an anomaly but only when something that never happens happens. Like a large enough mass/charge/etc or some flavor of unlikely coincidental occurrence, like an eclipse is a bit of a coincidence.

Just curious but why?

onceiwasthere 5y ago

They want an exciting disruption to current theory.

BurningFrog 5y ago
Basically they're bored/want mysteries to solve.
- zeven7 5y ago
  tbf, there is already a mystery to solve. This just means we have no new information to help us solve it.
- ohgodplsno 5y ago
  We're kind of at a dead end between both leading theories. A counterexample to either of them would mean that we got it wrong somewhere, and might help us figure out where, potentially unlocking more later. You wouldn't be surprised if your door opened just as usual when you put your key in the lock. The day it starts jamming however, you get very interested.
GuB-42 5y ago
Side note: Einstein didn't believe in black holes, at least initially. Black holes are a solution to the general relativity equations, but Einstein thought they were just a mathematical quirk, and that in real life, they wouldn't have been able to form. So ever time someone says "Einstein was right" when talking about black holes, then no. He was right about general relativity, but he was wrong about the existence of black holes.

_joel 5y ago

Many papers/authors postulating something different to what Einstein did?

adgjlsfhk1 5y ago

GR and quantum field theory don't work together, so at least one of them is wrong, and it would be good to figure out which and how.

jeremyjh 5y ago
Why would that matter at this scale ?
- dotnet00 5y ago
  Black holes are extreme enough to be one of the places where both can matter.
  - jeremyjh 5y ago
    Scale was not the right word - maybe I meant distance or resolution. Does QM make a prediction that could be falsified at this resolution?
markus_zhang 5y ago
Thanks. Can you please point me to some popular science article that explains why the two do not agree with each other?
- boschnix 5y ago
  I liked Sean Carroll's take on this with Steven Strogatz in the recent episode of Joy of Why. https://www.quantamagazine.org/where-do-space-time-and-gravity-come-from-20220504/ https://www.quantamagazine.org/where-do-space-time-and-gravi...
- rootbear 5y ago
  Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" does a very good, completely non-technical, job of explaining the conflict between the two theories. It then goes on to explain why String Theory is one possible solution to the problem.

kuekacang 5y ago

Sometimes physicists like the theories--especially the battle-tested ones--proven wrong so that those theories needs to be refined or reevaluated. Something related to the joy of problem solving.

mabbo 5y ago

Quantum Physics and General Relativity make different predictions in specific circumstances which are beyond our ability to test to figure out which one is wrong. They can't both be perfectly correct. But in every test we can make, both seem to model reality really well. The best place to look for new data where we might find reality disagreeing with either model is in the extreme parts of the universe, like black holes. If there was even a hint in this photo that General Relativity wasn't perfectly accurate, we might be able to take the discrepancy and build a new model that solves the disagreement. Whoever does that gets a Nobel Prize and has their name as immortalized as "Einstein".

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
zeven7 5y ago
Relatedly, before general relativity, people already knew something was wrong with Newton's theory of gravity from observing the orbit of Mercury, which didn't follow the theory accurately. At that time Mercury, being so close to the Sun, was an extreme condition that showed the flaws in the theory. The fact that general relativity continues to hold up to every observation we can make is remarkable.
- albrewer 5y ago
  I'd be willing to bet that the discrepancy is something that we generally consider invariant but in reality should be a ratio between two things that are very large, but get bigger or smaller at _slightly_ different rates depending on the scale or distances you're working with. Granted, I only ever got as far as E&M physics in college so I could be way off here but that scenario has turned up so many times in history.
- lordnacho 5y ago
  Could it happen that the universe simply never provides us with the required evidence? Eg if there's an anomaly but only when something that never happens happens. Like a large enough mass/charge/etc or some flavor of unlikely coincidental occurrence, like an eclipse is a bit of a coincidence.