Inquiry : Spacetime Ruptures and Bidirectional Time

[swansont]

10 hours ago, ovidiu t said:

I apologize. It mainly tries to solve AMPS paradox by EPR approach:  

1. Entanglement of "space" in vacuum 

2. Entangled Black holes (so it implies "un" entangled black holes) 

3. Entanglement as a phenomenon generating/ creating spacetime 

4. Entanglement quantum phenomenon bridging GR and QFT 

I suppose the scientist needs no introduction. He's part of the team working/starting string theory. 

 

 

This suggests you don’t know what entanglement is, or what was being proposed. How do you entangle space? What properties would be entangled?

How would entanglement create spacetime? 

[geordief]

28 minutes ago, swansont said:

This suggests you don’t know what entanglement is, or what was being proposed. How do you entangle space? What properties would be entangled?

How would entanglement create spacetime? 

I looked at the Susskind video.He seems to be saying that adjacent regions of space contain particles (virtual particles,was it?) that are entangled.

So the property of space being entangled (if I understood the lecture) was its property of containing  entangled particles close to  either side of a line dividing it.(not just at the event horizon  of a BH but generally)

 

And I think Susskind did refer to this as "space being entangled"

 

I found that extraordinary and I  think perhaps most  physicists may disagree with that (Susskind's caveat) but ,if that is accepted then he goes on to say that that might violate " entanglement monogamy"

Edited February 2 by geordief

[MigL]

Virtual particles are properties of a quantum field, below the threshold of action that would render them real.
The only way to claim virtual particles are a property of space, or space-time, is if you consider space-time a quantum field.

GR considers the geometry of space-time a field, but one that is purely classical in nature.

There is, currently, no description of space-time, and its associated vacuum energy, as a quantum field.
LQG might strive to do that; I'm not sure SString theory does.

[swansont]

5 hours ago, geordief said:

I looked at the Susskind video.He seems to be saying that adjacent regions of space contain particles (virtual particles,was it?) that are entangled.

So the property of space being entangled (if I understood the lecture) was its property of containing  entangled particles close to  either side of a line dividing it.(not just at the event horizon  of a BH but generally)

 

And I think Susskind did refer to this as "space being entangled"

It’s a dangerous thing when people give pop-sci explanations, and from it people think they understand the underlying science.

 

[geordief]

16 minutes ago, swansont said:

It’s a dangerous thing when people give pop-sci explanations, and from it people think they understand the underlying science.

 

Do you think Susskind was giving a pop-sci explanation?

Would that not be frowned upon  in the formal setting of what I assumed was a lecture (at Stanford ,I think)?

I think in this case he did preface his remarks by saying most would disagree.

 

[joigus]

On 2/1/2024 at 5:19 PM, Genady said:

And then, there is Freeman Dyson (F. Dyson, “The World on a String,” New York Review of Books, May 13, 2004)

The objection is expressed at 33:50 of the lecture I linked (without mentioning Dyson). If gravity were classical and gauge fields were quantum, you could beat the position-momentum HUP. Dyson's position basically is that Einstein's tensor is a classical field. But on the RHS of the equations you have the expected value of the energy-momentum tensor of quantum fields. You could, of course argue that there are <T²>-<T>² quantum fluctuations of these quantities, and thereby similar quantum fluctuations in the Einstein tensor.

On 2/2/2024 at 8:46 AM, ovidiu t said:

I apologize. It mainly tries to solve AMPS paradox by EPR approach:  

1. Entanglement of "space" in vacuum 

2. Entangled Black holes (so it implies "un" entangled black holes) 

3. Entanglement as a phenomenon generating/ creating spacetime 

4. Entanglement quantum phenomenon bridging GR and QFT 

I suppose the scientist needs no introduction. He's part of the team working/starting string theory. 

 

 

Yes, ER = EPR is due to Leonard Susskind and Juan Maldacena. I don't know about the state of the art of it, but it's a way to deal with quantum gravity that's being explored recently.

Edited February 3 by joigus
correction

[Genady]

13 minutes ago, joigus said:

You could, of course argue that there are <T²>-<T>² quantum fluctuations of these quantities, and thereby similar quantum fluctuations in the Einstein tensor.

I am now in the first chapters of Penrose's The Road to Reality. I know that he has his ideas on this topic, and I am curious but not there yet. 

[swansont]

15 hours ago, geordief said:

Do you think Susskind was giving a pop-sci explanation?

Would that not be frowned upon  in the formal setting of what I assumed was a lecture (at Stanford ,I think)?

I think in this case he did preface his remarks by saying most would disagree.

 

I’m not going to watch a 1:47 video to parse the context of the statement.