Hijack: Alternate idea regarding gravity and tensor force

[hoola]

I have an idea related to gravity and tensor force. If the entanglement phenomena is a result of a sort of communication between entangled particles, can a brief entanglement arise spontaneously between 2 remote particles? Imagine two remote groupings of particles A and B. If the spin-state of one particular particle of group A, has a random perfect match of the spin state of a particle in group B....are they not defacto, entangled? And, though they will quickly "untangle", for they are not isolated, for a brief finite period they were entangled, and some information was shared instantaneously, or at "the speed of gravity". So this "make and break" pulsing is a net tensor of gravitational force....or one graviton.....as transmitted between the biefly entangled particles. Since a "perfect" match of spin states is rare, this keeps the resultant force at a certain low level as compared to other forces.....edd

Edited December 21, 2013 by hoola

[hoola]

please change the above to read as ....or one graviton...as exchanged between briefly entangled particles. (The edit button does not appear to me for some reason, so I have to edit it here)....edd

A possible test of the entanglement as gravity causation would be to entangle 2 particles, then separate them into isolation chambers positioned some distance apart, measuring the positions of each particle. If there is a gravitational element to the entaglement feature, the positions of each particle should move towards each other within their chambers due to the gravitational effects. A movement of the particles should be of the accelerative nature of gravity's constant. If the entanglement is deliberately broken, the movement rate of each particle will become linear at that point, proceeding at a constant pace in the same trajectory with simple inertia...edd

[hoola]

I have a few generalized questions as to what particles and under what conditions a proposed entanglement derived gravity test could be performed. I am not clear as to if the photon or the electron have any mass. If they do not have mass, or have such a small amount so as to rule them out as best candidates, what particle would be a good choice for a test? The proton would be a probable candidate, I presume, with a well established mass. Before I begin the entanglement, if I have the protons within the isolated vacuum bottles, will the protons respond to the earth's gravity field and fall towards the bottom of the vessels? If they were in a electrically neutral bottle, I presume they would by not being repelled or attracted to any interior surface. The only force left would be gravity. Since the test has the two protons far apart, charge repulsion should not be a factor. Even so, perhaps an uncharged particle such as a neutron should be used. I am not clear if neutrons can be entangled. I have heard of electrons and photons being entangled. Lets presume they can be entangled and a test is set up. They have a known mass. In a control test, they are left un-entangled, and released in the middle of the containers. They should begin to move straight downwards. So, the main test will be to have two entangled neutrons, one each in the center of the two containers, and if they are responding to entanglement derived gravity, they will move in a general downward fashion, but angling towards each other in their trajectories. If the earth's gravity would overwhelm any clear observation of trajectory variations from the weak gravity via entanglement, the experiment might have to be done in a micro-gravity climate such as the ISS. Question: In the control test of the unentangled neutrons, would the speed of the fall of the neurons mirror gallileo's test and show them dropping at the same speed as a macroscopic object in a vacuum?

of course, if the test were to give a positive result that indicates gravity is a function of entanglement, while explaining the mechanics of gravity, it does not explain the underlying entanglement feature.....but would be a good start for that research. Plus, I would think it would bolster the "everything is information" idea...... edd

Edited December 22, 2013 by hoola

[Klaynos]

I'd strongly suggest reading some of the literature on entanglement, and not popsci.

[hoola]

yes, ignorance is the mother of mis-invention.....let's ignore the "speculative" entanglement derived gravity fable and please answer me a simple question as to a neutron in a vacuum chamber. Does it obey the same newtonian laws and fall at the same speed as an apple in a vacuum? Thanks, edd

[Klaynos]

A single neutron is not a classical object so your question is not well formed.

[hoola]

a neutron is not a classical object? Remarkable.....so a nucleon with a known mass is not a classical object....so, the question must be re-written to read....do non-classical single entities such as a neutron in a vacuum respond to gravity in similiar fashion to a standard classic object such as an apple in a vacuum....thank you for your patience and quick response.....edd

Edited December 22, 2013 by hoola

[ajb]

do non-classical single entities such as a neutron in a vacuum respond to gravity in similiar fashion to a standard classic object such as an apple in a vacuum....

As far as we know essentially yes, being careful here with quantum mechanics.

 

However gravity at the submillimeter scale is not well tested, let alone at the atomic scale.

[hoola]

? ....it seems an average of weak measurements should answer the question with certainty.....edd

[ajb]

? ....it seems an average of weak measurements should answer the question with certainty.....edd

Why?

 

At the scales we are talking about here the weak force is still going to dominate gravity.

[hoola]

the weak force is between the neucleons.....why would that matter to the interaction between a single nucleon and gravity?......thanks again, edd

Edited December 22, 2013 by hoola

[ajb]

the weak force is between the internal constituents of the neutron.....why would that matter to the interaction between the nucleon and gravity?......thanks again, edd

 

Did I misunderstand what you meant by "weak"?

[hoola]

sorry, I misspoke, read corrected entry,.....edd

I can see an answer to my corrected question without your answering it ......but I would like to hear your answer....edd

[ajb]

Protons are believed to be stable so they would not decay. Neutrons would decay into a proton an electron and an electron antineutrino.

 

Anyway the real problem here is that standard quantum mechanical effects as well as the fact that the forces of the standard model will dominate over gravity are going to make it difficult to test gravity at the atomic or subatomic scales.

[hoola]

my idea of why a neutron might not respond to gravity in a normal fashion is that the virtual particle soup within the vacuum instills a sort of "brownian motion" to the vacuum that overwhelms any weak force, such as gravity.....given this, a test should show a slow movement downward due to a "viscosity" from the virtual particles....edd

right, a free neutron would decay, so a proton then?

Do unbound nucleons zip around at the speed of light in nature? Couldn't a proton or some other suitable candidate be laser cooled to arrest motion for a test? Thank you so much for your time.....I will check out cryo as a start to understand the problems prohibiting a test. It is beginning to look like a test might be impossible at this time.....edd

Edited December 22, 2013 by hoola

[ajb]

my idea of why a neutron might not respond to gravity in a normal fashion is that the virtual particle soup within the vacuum instills a sort of "brownian motion" to the vacuum that overwhelms any weak force, such as gravity.....given this, a test should show a slow movement downward due to a "viscosity" from the virtual particles....edd

I am not sure you could really interpret things that way, but for sure a neutron will obey quantum mechanics and so its trajectory is a subtle issue. You can show that simply coupling Newtonian gravity to quantum mechanics gives very very small corrections. You would have to devise an experiment that is accurate enough to see these corrections.

 

People are looking into tests of gravity at the atomic scale. For example ultra cold neutrons may give us a way. Link

 

This is outside my area of expertise, maybe google can point you towards other experiments.

 

right, a free neutron would decay, so a proton then?

Protons in the standard model are stable, but GUTs may have proton decay. The lifetimes here are of the order 10^36 years.

 

 

Do unbound nucleons zip around at the speed of light in nature?

No they have mass ans so must travel at speeds less that the speed of light.

 

 

Couldn't a proton or some other suitable candidate be laser cooled to arrest motion for a test?

Maybe...

[hoola]

fantastic !! thank you so much ajb.....even if quantum effects overwhelm a proton's short-term interaction with gravity, perhaps a series of long term tests would give an averaged (or classical) output, indicating some residual interaction between the nucleon and gravity with quantifiable results.....edd

Edited December 23, 2013 by hoola

[hoola]

a positive test result would offer some ideas as to the coupling feature between dark energy and local matter, speaking of which, do you think dark energy and virtual particles are the same phenomena? edd

[ajb]

...do you think dark energy and virtual particles are the same phenomena? edd

Maybe if the cosmological constant is just the vacuum energy. The trouble is we cannot calculate anything near what is needed.

 

Usually the vacuum energy is arbitrary and unobservable, it is something we measure energy against. However in GR any form of energy contributes to the content of the Universe and so must be taken into account.

 

Also the cosmological constant is unchanging across the Universe. If Dark energy does not have this property then other models are needed which are usually based on scalar fields of various kinds.

[hoola]

I have a few long-standing questions as to the speed of entangled particles communicating a loss of entanglement vs. the speed of gravity. Newton's equations require (near) instantaneous action between bodies to function correctly. Does not straight line gravity reactions between orbiting bodies and entanglement failure reaction speed being (near) infinite, lead to the questions.... 1. is this assessment of these two speeds as superluminal correct? 2. is not the speed of inflation post big bang supposed to be (near) instantaneous? 3.are there any other speeds theorized to be superluminal in the universe?

Edited December 25, 2013 by hoola

[hoola]

I read the link to the ultra cold neutrons and the vibrating mirrors (!) and saw the equivalence principle reference as to a hammer and feather being dropped on the moon....I thought that some time ago that the equivalence was disproved, in the sense that a feather would drop slower than the hammer.. by a tiny amount. I don't remember anything was said to as why, but I can see that the dark energy anti-gravity would affect the lighter feather more than the hammer. This would be the "viscosity" of space and this would explain why gravity's effect is reduced by this quantum force under certain conditions, but not negated. Dealing with atomic sized particles of matter interaction with gravity being an extreme example. The link referred to casimir force being an issue in the problem of seeing gravity interactions. The case of casimir force "virtual particles" and dark energy being direct equivalents seems more apparent. The dark energy may not be responsible for all cosmic acceleration, as gravity may weaken at distances beyond possible entanglement induced gravity derivations. In local measures of the the force, the distance problem doesn't factor, so would make casimir force appear weaker than dark energy driven cosmic acceleration, without the gravity inconsistency between extreme distances making the dark energy appear stronger....edd

Edited December 26, 2013 by hoola

[ajb]

I thought that some time ago that the equivalence was disproved, in the sense that a feather would drop slower than the hammer.. by a tiny amount.

We have not observed any discrepancy from the equivalence principal yet.

 

I don't remember anything was said to as why, but I can see that the dark energy anti-gravity would affect the lighter feather more than the hammer.

We don't know what dark energy is, so we cannot say. I believe that people are thinking about violation of the equivalence principal in models of dark energy. You would have to look at the literature for details.

 

 

The link referred to casimir force being an issue in the problem of seeing gravity interactions. The case of casimir force "virtual particles" and dark energy being direct equivalents seems more apparent.

It depends on the details of dark energy. Like I said so far no-one has managed to calculate a sensible cosmological constant in this way. This is a bit of a problem.

[hoola]

I was thinking I had heard of some bracketing of the cosmological constant with the supernova studies of '96.... coming from the study other than the simple statement of acceleration... the acceleration rate depends upon the distance away....so a bracketing of this curve of "accleration/distance" seems possible, but somehow isn't.....?

[ajb]

I am not an expert in this, but for sure it was the study of "standard candles" in the 90's that showed that the Universe is not just expanding but accelerating. The simplest explanation for this is the cosmological constant.