New Theory of Gravity Decouples Space & Time 575
eldavojohn writes "Petr Horava, a physicist at the University of California in Berkeley, has a new theory about gravity and spacetime. At high energies, it actually snips any ties between space and time, yet at low energies devolves to equivalence with the theory of General Relativity, which binds them together. The theory is gaining popularity with physicists because it fits some observations better than Einstein's or Newton's solutions. It better predicts the movement of the planets (in an idealized case) and has a potential to create the illusion of dark matter. Another physicist calculated that under Horava Gravity, our universe would experience not a Big Bang but a Big Bounce — and the new theory reproduces the ripples from such an event in a way that matches measurements of the cosmic microwave background."
Oh no... (Score:1, Funny)
You mean the space-time continuum doesn't exist? Star Trek is wrong?
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
We have reached enlightenment. We shall now call ourselves Q.
(huuummmm)
Man this is dull.
So help me out here. (Score:5, Funny)
Does this theory suck or is there some pull to it? It just seems so weighty to me.
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
I believe they will all be right, but it will only be from the perspective of the observer/believer which is right at the moment. However when it isn't being observed it will be both right and wrong until observed again. Therefore there are multiple pinnacles and it won't matter which are right or highest. Just have your towel ready because on top of the pinnacle is a little man who is only going to apologize for the inconvenience.
Always have a towell ready.
Re:Much more mathematical detail... (Score:5, Funny)
It's a PDF version of a PowerPoint deck, so it's not exactly easy to read.
Indeed, informative link but I think your signature should be at the start of your post. I was doing pretty good right up until they plugged the ansatz into the Horava’s action to produce the reduced Lagrangian.
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh no... (Score:5, Funny)
If you reverse the polarity, inject some chroniton particles, and rub Patrick Stewart's head for good luck, it'll still work.
Re:Much more mathematical detail... (Score:5, Funny)
... until they plugged the ansatz into the Horava’s action to produce the reduced Lagrangian.
Huh. I didn't get that far. And I'm pretty sure that whatever it that is, it's illegal in Texas.
some modest hypotheses (Score:4, Funny)
2. I don't think time, as in "time lines" or some kind of unidirectional movement through a medium exists. Now exists, hypostatized out of a past (which stops existing when it stops being now) and which in turn hypostatizes the future (which does not exist.)
3. Electromagnetism is the dominant force in the heavens as it is on Earth.
4. Stars are organisms and they reproduce through fission.
5. Galaxies are powered by vast electric circuits; beads on a string.
Re:Correction: (Score:5, Funny)
Or maybe you actually meant the theory would be better than 'Reletivity'. That could work.
Re:And FTL, too (Score:3, Funny)
Your cited experiment seems to show entanglement by observation is FTL.
But really, what's faster than a two-year old? Therein is the true upper-end limit of c.
Re:Excellent! (Score:3, Funny)
In my home reality, we had machines to jump into parallel dimensions, but baguettes were outlawed when Palin took the U.S. presidency and invaded France.
I hadn't heard of the croaking bird dimension though. I'll have to visit.
Re:Not again (Score:1, Funny)
Gosh darnit. Two guys I'd like to do my PhD under (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And FTL, too (Score:5, Funny)
I have to assume he did not - lacking clarification on the matter I'm left to assume that the conditions were not something simple he could test no a whim.
Wow. Anyone else see that? From my location, the n arrived before the o; however, the parent clearly typed them in order (o before n) in our reference frame, so I think we've just witnessed information traveling faster than light! Woohoo!
I have a hypothesis about gravity. (Score:4, Funny)
My hypothesis about gravity:
Everything is growing. We can't see anything growing, because our rulers and tapemesures and everything is growing. That's gravity: Just the growing earth pushing against your growing feet. Gravity at a distance is just objects growing towards each others (the void doesn't grow). Come to think of it. It's probably a bad hypothesis. It couldn't explain a slingshot effect, could it? Nevermind.
But does it also predict (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
Then I shall be Fah Q 2!
Re:Not again (Score:2, Funny)
Peh! I am named FAH KING AWESOME
Re:And FTL, too (Score:5, Funny)
It's strange to me that Dvali would abandon his model for allowing FTL propagation of information unless he experimentally checked the conditions in question to see if information really could propagate FTL in those cases.
Sorry, my bad. I have to be the one who checks for FTL propagation, union rules. I'll get to it after I finish my "get laid" project. I'm particularly hopeful. Just the other day, I made eye contact for 1.3 seconds with what I assume to be the female of our species. I think I can get that up to 10 seconds without breaking any laws of the legal kind. It's very promising progress here.
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
Well Fah Q both then
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Not again (Score:3, Funny)
To differentiate myself from the lot of you bores I shall take a first name: Fah. From this point on I am Fah Q! :)
Just curious, do you own a horse?...
Re:And FTL, too (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Not again (Score:3, Funny)
Same as with the Highlander. But I digress.
Re:Excellence: Biography of Petr Hoava (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I've got it. (Score:3, Funny)
The Jatravartid People of Viltvodle Six firmly believe that the entire universe was sneezed out of the nose of a being called The Great Green Arkleseizure. They live in perpetual fear of the time they call The Coming Of The Great White Handkerchief.
Re:Not again (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ow! (Score:2, Funny)
Nah, don't worry. In a few years it'll all be glommed together again as space-time-matter-energy with one spiffy equation to rule them all.
... and in the dark matter bind them.
Re:Not again (Score:1, Funny)
There are actually only to possibilities. Either the things continue to work the same way they did before, or they don't. If they do, then acting on the assumption that they do is clearly the right choice. If they don't, then we have no idea what to do; whatever we do could be right or wrong. Therefore the rational behaviour is to assume that the rules continue to work.
Is that you, Pascal?
YOU ARE ALL WRONG. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Not again (Score:4, Funny)
It's always interesting how quick some people without deeper knowledge of the matter are with labeling something as nonsense.
I have 3 dark PhD's, and I say it's bunk!
Re:Not again (Score:1, Funny)
QQQQ all
Re:Not again (Score:3, Funny)
Good Lord! I haven't even got relativity down pat yet! How can I get my head around this new stuff and does it explain the warp speeds of Starship Enterprise?