gravitons

Originally posted by sonhouse
If there were deviations from the inverse square law, that would be solid evidence of hidden curled up dimensions. What it proves? That the universe is more than we see for sure. It would be Nobel prize material for one thing.

That would open up string or Mbrane theory as having some real street cred.

Bear in mind that general relativity predicts a small 1/r³ correction to the inverse square law. Not only do they have to show deviations from the inverse square law, but that the deviation isn't explainable by general relativity.

Originally posted by woadman
Have you heard of Max tegmark ? I've senn him in TV documentaries. He believes in the Multiverse.

He's a crackpot!

There, I said it.

at the big bang there was "inflation" of space/time that produced gravitational "WAVES". Even these waves have not been detected/verified. Just like gravitons are beyond the realm of todays scientists. Gravity is too tough to figure out. We need a new Einstein..

Originally posted by woadman
at the big bang there was "inflation" of space/time that produced gravitational "WAVES". Even these waves have not been detected/verified. Just like gravitons are beyond the realm of todays scientists. Gravity is too tough to figure out. We need a new Einstein..

The prospects of measuring gravitational waves are a bit better than those of measuring gravitons (in technical terms, measuring a graviton would prove the quantization of gravitational waves; gravitational waves do not rely on a quantum description). Efforts to measure these waves are currently ongoing and it would not surprise me if they would succeed in the coming decades.

By the way, gravitational waves (if they exist) are generated all the time - they are just the carriers of the gravitational force, like the graviton.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
The prospects of measuring gravitational waves are a bit better than those of measuring gravitons (in technical terms, measuring a graviton would prove the quantization of gravitational waves; gravitational waves do not rely on a quantum description). Efforts to measure these waves are currently ongoing and it would not surprise me if they would succeed ...[text shortened]... nerated all the time - they are just the carriers of the gravitational force, like the graviton.

There's the observation of binary pulsars orbits decaying, which implies they are emitting gravitational radiation, so they've been indirectly observed.

Originally posted by DeepThought
There's the observation of binary pulsars orbits decaying, which implies they are emitting gravitational radiation, so they've been indirectly observed.

From what I understand, this is not taken as conclusive evidence for the existence of gravitational waves.

Originally posted by DeepThought
There's the observation of binary pulsars orbits decaying, which implies they are emitting gravitational radiation, so they've been indirectly observed.

"...which implies they are emitting gravitational radiation..."

That's a guess, nothing more.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
That's a guess, nothing more.

Its more than a guess.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its more than a guess.

It's a qualified guess.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
It's a qualified guess.

Its more than a qualified guess.

It's superman!

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
From what I understand, this is not taken as conclusive evidence for the existence of gravitational waves.

People like arguing. As I understand it the decay rates match the GR predictions quite closely so there'd need to be a cosmic conspiracy for it to be anything else.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Its more than a qualified guess.

"...which implies they are emitting gravitational radiation..."

A guess, a hypothesis, an implication, nothing more.

When the gravitational radiation is measured, come back and tell me.
Have gravitational radiation been measured at all anywhere?

Originally posted by FabianFnas
A guess, a hypothesis, an implication, nothing more.

I would put it down as 'the best explanation to date'. Do you have a better explanation?

Originally posted by twhitehead
I would put it down as 'the best explanation to date'. Do you have a better explanation?

'The best guess to date' would be a better statement.