POVphysics

The expanding graviton, as I characterize it, describes EVERYTHING in physics, time, spacetime, qm, gr, sr, standard model, physics constants, dark matter, dark energy, EVERYTHING! And it comes with an experiment. In contrast, the tens of thousands of physics geniuses claim that superstrings and quantum loop gravity are the correct theory, and if not that, than the Many World Interpretation, because if you have 10^10^10^42 universes, your wrong guesses are bound to be right in some other universe. Listen to all the answer's, then reflect... You have all these popular physicists telling us what reality is supposed to be, and they can't come up with anything better than MWI and superspaghetti? I can do better than that!

I keep asking if superstrings are supposed to yield EVERYTHING in physics, everything that exists in nature. But all I get is fluff! I don't know what that means.

Wait, that's not true either. The zodiac signs have descriptions. The planetary positions have effects. What is string theory based on? Vibrating spaghetti?

What if we run out of life before we get there? Make babies.

Of course, it makes absolutely no difference to me... 😉 What would you gain, if your wild arsed guess' prove to be correct??? It would lead to gravity field generators, which lead to things like tractor beams and propulsion. It's actually really cool stuff. Using a quantum entanglement field, you can store gravitational potential energy using equipment I haven't talked about yet. It still strikes me as weird that the physics community is adamant about not believing in Astrology, but you believe in superstrings.

So your content to being told that we live in an infinite multiverse that is made of superstrings, no questions asked. You don't want any empirical evidence, you just accept those things at face value? Is that correct? Your neg rep given to me and continued moving of the goal posts suggests you missed my actual point. Disappointing, but unsurprising. So your deflecting a simple question. Okay, where are the real physics conversations going on? The ones with actual experiments? Superstrings are a mathematical invention that the creators don't even believe describes our universe. But when someone comes along with a simplification and an experiment, then suddenly everyone gets hostile Someone here even gave me a bad mark because I said that ALL science is based on empirical evidence. When did you guys become a religion? Who was your first saint?

Are superstrings supposed to be the only thing that exists, that creates everything? We're not dealing with single photons. We're dealing with two photons that are quantum entangled. Now can you please make the argument of why a quantum entanglement with two entangled photons cannot be described with a wave function?

Wait a minute. Are you really proclaiming that the frequency of a photon can NEVER change along the x-axis? Maybe you never had a chance to learn about gravitational redshift or gravitational time dilation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_redshift https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation I mean, maybe nobody ever told you that the frequency of a photon can change as it travels along the radii as it falls into a black hole. That would cause blueshift. And if a photon was tryng to travel out of a gravity well of a black hole, along the radius, then it would redshift. It's great to memorize equations, but if you don't know what they mean, then maybe you shouldn't be rude about.

How about this...

It's one of those situations where, if I had the expertise to do the experiment myself, I would. The mathematics is not the appropriate tool to use in this situation. It's more of a situation where the definition of gravitons is incomplete. In order for quantum gravity to be discovered, it's necessary to figure out what quantum mechanics and gravity have in common. There are also situations where parts of physics are not being talked about, namely, the physics constants. Natural units is equivalent to sweeping them under the rug. While proponents of Intelligent Design use physics constants to support their position, it simultaneously scares away atheists, which is the dominant ideology of the physics community. For reasons that I can explain later, I decided that there need to be carriers of the physics constants; and those carriers would be gravitons. And if I'm wrong, it won't effect anything. But the physics community has this idea that gravitons are just like other particles - points moving around; but if they were, we wouldn't need them. There are reasons to believe that a graviton should be an expanding sphere of radius r = ct, like it's exploding outward. When I made that assumption, then suddenly I could explain what spacetime really is, I could explain lots and lots of things in physics. But I wanted to know that I was right, on the right track. If I couldn't do superstring theory mathematics, then I would have to trump it's mathematics with an experiment. Since quantum entanglements are the only thing in physics that is experimentally readily available, and also "spooky action at a distance" I mean, someone would have to be brain dead not to wonder if there is more to a quantum entanglement than just "correlation". I mean, shucks! The idea that a quantum entanglement field could exist is just impossible because nothing else in nature behaves like a field!

I want to acknowledge that calculations and stable equations that don't blow up are important to physicists. But performing calculations are not the only way to do physics. I'm talking about a way to disturb the quantum states for momentum and position, in a local way, in a low energy way that doesn't rely upon the stress-energy tensor. The idea I have in mind is a NON-EQUILIBRIUM event. I agree with you that it's too hard to do the calculations of a graviton field because the scientific community doesn't have a good handle on what a graviton really is. It would be much easier to assume, for the purposes of preparing an experiment, that Expanding Gravitons have quantum states built into them, and that gravitons are quantum entanglements, and we can capture gravitons with quantum entangled photons, because the "thing" between the entangled photons IS a graviton. It's easy to create a quantum entanglement field. It's significantly harder to charge it with gravitational potential energy, but with dedication...

Have you ever tried to write down a quantum field theory for self-interacting spin-2 gravitons, with the appropriate classical limits? It’s a doable exercise. Unfortunately the end result is a QFT that is non-renormalisable, so it does not yield any physically meaningful predictions. Clearly, this approach leads exactly nowhere. In a Wave functions = expanding gravitons interpretation, the gravitons are supposed to begin at a point, expand spherically at the speed of light, and eventually overlap. Two expanding gravitons would overlap in such a way as to combine their quantum states for momentum and position. When you have 10^100 gravitons that are several light seconds or larger diameters, then you really just get the spacetime continuum and the Einstein equations. Renormalization might be a requirement for a quantum field theory calculation, but it's not a priority for nature to create gravity fields. I'm pretty sure we would have to conduct new experiments on quantum entanglement fields before we could get data that could be described with mathematics. But it's more important to figure out if a quantum entanglement field can serve as a gravitational potential energy field. If we can demonstrate that, then we can work towards tractor beams and chemical free propulsion.

String theory How can string theory be reality if there is no experimental data to confirm it?

You might want to save that for many of the other universes, where Swantsont expressed some fascination. MWI is nonsense.

Give me an example of a field of science that is not based on experimental data. I am genuinely surprised that someone, in a science forum, would give me a markdown for affirming the requirement that science be based on empirical evidence.

Are you all stumped? All science is empirically based. Even theoretical physics should be tethered to established physics. If it's not, then how do you know you're not just practicing Astrology? Numerology?

All science is based on experimental evidence. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has ever thought to create a quantum entanglement field.

Because they can tie so many loose ends in physics together. They would explain length contraction and time dilation as being an interaction between two gravitons with a relative velocity. We would be able to answer the question: what is spacetime made of. We can answer the question: how are the physics constants introduced into our universe. What are wave functions. How does gravity work. Wait a minute. You're argument against my theory is based upon the inaccurate conclusion of the Michelson Morley experiment. You assume that since MM measured no movement of the earth in the "luminiferous aether" then therefore no medium of any kind, regardless of its properties can exist. The entanglement field exists until the laser is switched off. Then, presumably the entanglements would decay. But what we're really after, is that we have good reasons to believe the quantum entanglement field can be used to store gravitational potential energy in those momentum quantum states. If the beamstops are replaced with peices of Gallium Aluminum Arsenide, then the photons would be trapped between the electron energy levels of the crystal. If the photons are trapped, then the quantum entanglement field would have a slower decay rate. There are quantum mechanics operators px and x. They are applied to the wave function PSI. Gravitons behave like objects that are made out of mathematics and physic constants. So the quantum operators are therefore, just characteristics of expanding gravitons. When they collide with particles, they can become part of the quantum field around the particles, that is described by wavefunctions. In this way, gravitons are wave functions. Eventually, the graviton can escape the quantum system, expand, and become part of the spacetime continuum. It's a way of recycling gravitons for other uses. This is to imply that spacetime itself is made of objects that have quantum states for position/momentum built into them.

I'm not so sure that's true. There are some people who believe that QM is so weird, that there exists an infinite number of universe every time someone decides what they're going to have for dinner. I mean, if you have to ask for an infinite number of universes to make your interpretation sound reasonable, but there are no supporting facts or evidence, then where are you?

If expanding gravitons exist, then they have gravitational potential energy built into them as characteristics. Quantum entanglements between two photons are gravitons. If that is so, then I can take a laser, and split the beam into two beams of entangled photons P1 and P2 (by using the appropriate quantum entanglement crystal). I can use mirrors to send P1 beam into beam stop1, and P2 into beam stop 2. Beam stops 1 and 2 are separated by a few inches. I can accumulate a quantity of entangled photons between the two beam stops. I believe there exists a quantum entanglement field between those two beam stops. Are you ready for the second part of the experiment? Overlap means that bosons can share the same space. It's important to my hypothesis because overlapping expanding gravitons is fundamental to explaining what spacetime is, and how it's different from the virtual particle fields of the standard model. I'm not that familiar with solitons, other than to know that solitons are made of many waves.

I don't wish to deprive you of your fascination with MWI. My goal is to offer an interpretation that leads to experiments that lead to manipulating the position/momentum quantum states of gravitons, which results in gravity field effects.

No, what I did was I looked for patterns in QM/GR/SR/big bang cosmology/physics constants/what is time/what is spacetime, and I looked for the simplest explanation to explain all those phenomena. I built my model out of well established physics. And out popped an experiment. What are guesses? Guesses are insights that can be tested. If physics is not about experiments, then it's not better than astrology.

The problem with the Many World Interpretation is the same problem physicists have with ghosts. There is no physical evidence to support the claim. It's like wandering through your house, from the living room to the kitchen, and trying to make the argument that because you changed rooms, you changed houses. Or because an onlooker looks at your house and doesn't know where you are in your house, that you must be in the multi-house verse.

Any questions about where the physics constants came from should be directed to the justifiable existence of Expanding Gravitons. What causes the physics constants? They are characteristics of gravitons. One of the characteristics of bosons is that they overlap. The same is true of gravitons. In fact, they pretty much do nothing but overlap. The existence of virtual particle fields is, I would firmly speculate, the effect of gravitons overlapping. But only the subset of gravitons that have an age between t1 and t2 (and radius r1 and r2). The surface area of Expanding Gravitons are photons. The interior of the graviton are the quantum states (particularly for position and momentum). The Spin 2 property of gravitons is what relates it to the stress energy tensor, a matrix which is a rank 2 tensor. There is a way to show that momentum quantum states in the interior of gravitons can be used to induce forces. I can explain how expanding gravitons can be used to account for gravitational forces.

Physics is either founded on empirical evidence, or it's no better than astrology. Incidentally, if wave functions = expanding gravitons, then wave functions DO NOT COLLAPSE. They expand, at the speed of light, beyond the quantum system; essentially they escape quantum systems by expanding, not collapsing.