Loop Quantum Gravity

sometimes called a possible "unified field theory" it's pretty fascinating, the little bit i can keep up with this sorta stuff. from what i read string theory is still the leading contender but this stuff seems to have huge interest because its been explaining a few things, one of which is what happened before the big bang. (theoretically)
quantum mechanics and string theory can't even come close to being workable before the moment just after singularity.
just another thing i can't get my head around

can anyone with access to academic papers post this somewhere here or email?

http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0601129v2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggbrYViGbyQ"]Loop quantum gravity 01 - YouTube

 

The PDF of the paper can be downloaded for free from the website you posted.

 

apparently i'm not the rocket scientist i like to think i am ... thx ! :love:

 

When I was in school ( 70s) they perty much stopped at what made up an atom . Quatom phy. was not relly covered . This is at the level of the very tinny, it may be impossable to check many of the theories . You might want to watch the movie what the bleep do we know .
I did find these links http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity
http://physics.about.com/od/unifiedfieldtheories/f/loopquantgrav.htm
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-1998-1/
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Loop_quantum_gravity
http://www.loopquantumgravity.org/
Some sci forums
http://www.scienceforums.net/
http://www.sciencechatforum.com/
http://scienceforums.com/
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php
http://able2know.org/forum/science/

 

This movie covers a lot of stuff .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usMsTPg-hHk"]WHAT THE BLEEP DO WE KNOW.DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE - YouTube

 

thanks for the links

i'll take a pass on any of the what the bleep related stuff. it's kinda fuzzy science at best.

http://www.salon.com/2004/09/16/bleep_2/

 

Yeah that movie What the Bleep was the worst! No offense. What was with that 20 minute segment with them playing basketball lol? If I'm remembering correctly...

 

I think LQG makes a lot more sense than String theory, which requires time itself to be a dimension, which is ludicrous.

Time of course is the progress of movement which applies to energy more appropriately than space. Space should be thought of as the medium (fabric or substance or foam...) in which energy propagates. IMO it should be Energy-Time even though it is also the fluctuation of the spacial fabric, it is not the spatial fabric itself that is relevant to our universe, as far as energy and matter anyway.

Look at the graph on the OP video at 6 minutes. It's very simple and very telling... Spacetime on the left is wrong. Energy warps space as much as warped space is energy. It is the same thing. Fluctuations propagating in spatial fabric makes energy as much as energy causes fluctuations in the fabric of space. Gravity distorts space as much as spatial distortions create gravity. It is all one substance, the fabric of space. Time is not married to the fabric itself but the movement of distortions within the fabric; waves, energy.

 

time is a dimension though.

 

what i can figure out so far is that string theory is still a leading unified field theory because as fascinating as LQG is apparently it doesn't take into acccount quantum particle theory so there are theorists out there that say it cannot become the master equation.
seems to me its another stepping stone, there's way too many people out there working on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQaHVm6dp14"]String Theory Is The Only Game In Town - YouTube

 

So time IS a dimension as long as your not talking about physical reality?

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-physicists-abolish-fourth-dimension-space.html

 

You are dealing with the very tiny . Too tiny to be ever scene. In high energy phy. they smash particles togher and see what what fly s out . Lets say you smash two cars and get a gear from the trans. "aha " that is what a car is made from . On the movie what the bleep do we know , its perty deep , you need to watch it a few times to fully get it . One basic theam is that each of our thoughts creates our own reality .

 

you quoted my quote, then misquoted it?

wiki

as for that article

That is what makes time a "coordinate", or datum point. As a "dimension" it isn't solid or tangible, that's what makes it counter-intuitive. 4 dimensions:

1. a line.
2. a plane (i.e. a square on a surface with no depth)
3. a cube or other 3-D "object" or a precise location in space by specifying the three physical dimensions (directions) at an exact intersecting point by use of XYZ coordinates
4. that point in space, described at a precise "position" in time.

Those 4 dimensions are used to describe a point in space at an exact moment in time, which is (to keep it simple) only a linear direction from past to present to future.
That is the "dimensional" nature of time.

Mix any two dimensions and you have a descriptor for a certain catagory.

2 dimensions (length x width) gives you a plane.

3 dimensions (length x width x depth) at a position in time is simply a more detailed description.
The problem is, as noted in your link, people equate space and time incorrectly when they hear "space-time"

one can always find some fringe science to back up anything.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=The_Conspiracy

 

or another way to look at it...

if you and i were gonna meet up at a place and smoke out, i'd have to give you these data points:

Where: a gps type coordinate. a two-dimensional location like, hmm, a street address. But you get there and it's the Empire State Building. So I add a numerical "location" in the 3rd dimension by telling you my pad is on the 69th floor, and give you more precise 2D coordinates by adding that its suite 6920.

What good is an exact location in 3D space without a time?

Sorry man, you're late. I smoked all the weed.
You got any?

 

There's a problem when you combine real physical dimensions and abstract non-physical points of time and try to unify it as one reality. Because in REALITY, past points in time no longer exist anywhere! Nor do future points exist yet. It seems to me as some scientists were plotting time on some graphs, they totally forgot what the hell time actually is.

 

Time is a tricky subject in this day and age. Its not classified as a spatial dimension, like the 3 that we're commonly aware of.
It's not impossible with what we think we know, to one day travel to or at least view the past. Wormholes may link different points in time, not only space. There seems to be a whole realm of possibilities. I won't take on any belief, personally. Not yet. It's not very testable.

 

Captain Entropy says, "String theory, worm holes, time travel, and holographic universes are bullshit".

 

love it ! :2thumbsup:

but thats some hard logic to follow, are you saying after being partially responsible for things like worm holes and descent into chaos from singularity to ever expanding space and time, that Captain Entropy now denies all involvement?
might take me some time to catch up.