Looking for the granularity of spacetime

  • Thread starter wolram
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Spacetime
In summary, the author suggests that Cerenkov radiation is detectable in a vacuum if something is traveling faster than the speed of light.
  • #1
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
4,446
558
on the subject of looking for the granularity of spacetime,
cherenkov radiation is given of if a particle exceeds c
when traveling through a medium, i know that water is used
for the medium on Earth as it does not require the initial
>c particle, but tachyons if they exist travel many times
c so cherenkov radiation should be observable in spacetime,
or am i wrong as usual?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If tachyons would exist you would observe a blue radiation coming from the vacuum all the time. The no existence of this light practically is the death sentence for tachyons
 
  • #3
or of space time, heads or tails, or i could be totaly
wrong, maybe someone will put us on the right track?
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Perhaps proponents of tachyons would say that Cherenkov radiation requires a medium for the particle to collide with? This would seem a reasonable response, as a vacuum does not collide with anything. At least, not in the classical sense of "collision" which gives rise to CR.
 
  • #5
LURCH has raised an interesting point, and is what could cause the Cerenkov radiation in a vacuum?. In a medium like water, for example, when a particle travels faster than light in that medium, the molecules of water are polarized in the direction of movement of the particle, and after a while return to their normal state, emitting a pulse of blue light. But what can be polarized in a vacuum?
However there are a bunch of pages in Internet that claims that Cerenkov radiation should be observed in a vacuum when tachyons are present
http://www.geocities.com/ashokktiwari/tachyons.html
http://www.physics.gmu.edu/~e-physics/bob/h.htm [Broken]
Should I conclude that these are crank pages?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Oh, well, I've reading the second of my links, and say that charged tachyons should have been observed provoking Cerenkov radiation, but not necessarily not charged tachyons
But still I don't understand hoew a charged tachyon can provoke Cerenkov radiation in a vacuum
 
  • #7
i think this has more to do with the idea that spacetime is
grainy and is made up of Planckian cells, a bit like
uniform bubbles, QLT suggests that spacetime has structure
and is not just the vacuum, so if spacetime has structure
it can be considered to be a medium.
i think this is why it is considered possible to observe
cherenkov radiation if anything is traveling >C in
"spacetime".
 
  • #8
But the molecules of water are polarized because they have charge and are affected by the passing of a charged particle. Are you suggesting that these "planckian cells" have charge too?
 
  • #9
But the molecules of water are polarized because they have charge and are affected by the passing of a charged particle. Are you suggesting that these "planckian cells" have charge too?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
no i am suggesting nothing, i am just trying to understand
or explore the possibilities, but gravity has the potential
to do work, so it could be given an energy value, why not
in the form of charge?
 
  • #10
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9610/9610089.pdf [Broken]

this paper is speculative but in section 2 dynamics
and cosmology it suggests that cherenkov radiation
is detectable in the vacuum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #11
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/GR/grav_radiation.html

However, there is good evidence that Cgw is in fact at least almost Cem. We observe high energy cosmic rays in the 1020 to 1021 eV region. Such particles are traveling at up to (1-10-18)*Cem. If Cgw < Cem, then particles with Cgw < v < Cem will radiate Cherenkov gravitational radiation into the vacuum, and decelerate from the back reaction. So evidence of these very fast cosmic rays is good evidence that Cgw >= (1-10-18)*Cem, very close indeed to Cem. Bottom line: in a purely Einsteinian universe, Cgw = Cem. However, a class of models not yet ruled out experimentally does make other predictions.
------------------------------------------------------------------
it seems that others have already thought about this
and i though it was origonal:frown:
 
  • #12
Wait, I could be missing something, but how can anything travel faster than light?
 
  • #13
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light

It is important to realize that the speed of light is not a "speed limit" in the conventional sense. As a consequence of the theory of special relativity, all observers will measure the speed of light as being the same. An observer chasing a beam of light well measure it moving away from him at the same speed as a stationary observer. This leads to some unusual consequences for velocities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

its all very unintuitive, but you will find lots on the
web.
 

1. What is the concept of "looking for the granularity of spacetime"?

The concept of "looking for the granularity of spacetime" is the idea that space and time may not be continuous and infinitely divisible, but instead have a smallest unit or building block. This would mean that there is a fundamental granularity or "graininess" to the fabric of the universe.

2. Why is it important to study the granularity of spacetime?

Studying the granularity of spacetime is important because it could provide a deeper understanding of the fundamental nature of the universe. It could also potentially reconcile the theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics, which currently have fundamental differences in how they describe the fabric of spacetime.

3. How is the granularity of spacetime being investigated?

The granularity of spacetime is being investigated through various approaches, including experiments using high-energy particle accelerators to probe the smallest scales of the universe. Theoretical models and mathematical calculations are also being used to explore the implications of a granular spacetime structure.

4. What evidence supports the existence of a granular spacetime?

Currently, there is no definitive evidence for a granular spacetime. However, some theories, such as loop quantum gravity, suggest that spacetime may have a discrete structure. Additionally, some observations from astrophysics, such as the black hole information paradox, could potentially be explained by a granular spacetime.

5. What are the potential implications of discovering a granular spacetime?

If a granular spacetime is discovered, it could have significant implications for our understanding of the universe. It could provide a resolution to the problem of singularities in general relativity, shed light on the nature of dark matter and dark energy, and potentially lead to new technologies and advancements in our understanding of the universe.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
338
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
743
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
30
Views
498
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top