4 ms·
Electromagnetism is both a continuous wave and a discrete particle, so it makes sense to me that a continuous spacetime curvature could also be a discrete parti
by gary_0 2y ago
Electromagnetism is both a continuous wave and a discrete particle, so it makes sense to me that a continuous spacetime curvature could also be a discrete particle at the same time. (Keeping in mind we're not talking about tangible shapes but mathematical models that describe aspects of reality that are hard for humans to intuitively conceptualize.)
Of course, our idea of how to reconcile quantum gravity with general relativity is much less developed than our understanding of electromagnetism and the nuclear forces.
- Willingham 2y agoWhen you mention nuclear forces, are you referencing weak force and strong force? Do we understand these forces at the same level that we understand electromagnetism?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- btilly 2y agoYes. The Standard Model has completely explained all experiments involving them for around 50 years now. In fact the outstanding success of the Standard Model has posed its own problems - the lack of deviations from it makes it hard for experiments to point in a useful direction for better theories to be developed along.
- elashri 2y ago> the lack of deviations from it makes it hard for experiments to point in a useful direction for better theories to be developed along. We have anomalies (deviations from standard model) in many measurements done by several experiments. This is a good summary [1] from them up until now (sorry for the pay-walled) [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s42254-024-00703-6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s42254-024-00703-6
- jcranmer 2y agoThat's not quite accurate. There are a few things that the Standard Model doesn't exactly account for--neutrino oscillation being the most famous. The trouble is that these issues aren't really big enough to suggest new physics, and the experiments aren't good enough to really suggest how much patching actually needs to be done.
- jraines 2y agoAlso the unexpectedly large mass of the Higgs, which suggested (to string theorists), super symmetry. Which unfortunately turned out to not exist unless it’s at some configuration that’s quite different from what was suggested
- pfdietz 2y agoI thought the Higgs had an unexpectedly small mass. https://home.cern/news/news/physics/incredible-lightness-higgs https://home.cern/news/news/physics/incredible-lightness-hig...
- btilly 2y agoYes, there are some deviations. But minor adjustments to the Standard Model handles those. And don't really point in the direction of a better theory. More relevantly to the previous question, I'm not aware of any of those which affect interactions with the strong or weak nuclear forces.
- jcranmer 2y agoNeutrinos predominantly work via the weak interaction, don't they?
- somat 2y agoMy understanding is the particle model of electromagnetism, the photon, really only shows up where the em field interacts with matter(electrons really), the em field itself is not quantized, or at least not quantized at the level of the photon. Not that this really matters(intentional), we can only interact with the em field as matter so that is what matters.
- alkonaut 2y ago> matter so that is what matters At first I thought this was a great pun. But then this is perhaps also the reason the word is actually "matters"? Where "matters" is what means something? What matters is what has an observable effect?
- dist-epoch 2y agoThe most elegant description of electromagnetism is also in terms of curvature, but the curvature of a certain mathematical structure called "connection on fiber bundles" and the math field is called differential geometry.