Posts: 455   +7
Staff
Bottom line: For decades, physicists have been trying to solve one of the greatest mysteries in science: how gravity operates at the smallest scales governed by quantum mechanics. While we have theories explaining gravity's effects on large objects like planets and stars, we still don't fully understand how it functions at the subatomic level.

The leading idea is that gravity arises from the exchange of hypothetical "graviton" particles, much like electromagnetism arises from the exchange of photons. However, gravitons have always been considered too difficult to observe because they interact with matter very weakly, similar to neutrinos.

Recently, a team of researchers led by Igor Pikovski published a paper in Nature Communications demonstrating how gravitons might be experimentally detectable using quantum sensing techniques. In other words, scientists may soon be able to "see" gravity.

Pikovski's team realized they could adapt an old physics concept – the photoelectric effect, first explained by Einstein in 1905 – to detect gravity. Einstein theorized that light is composed of tiny, indivisible packets called photons. He used this idea to explain the photoelectric effect, predicting that energy is exchanged between light and matter only in discrete amounts. Despite initial resistance, this theory ultimately proved to be revolutionary.

"Our solution mimics the photoelectric effect, but we use acoustic resonators and gravitational waves that pass Earth," explained PhD student Germain Tobar, a co-author of the study. "We call it the 'gravito-phononic' effect."

Here's how it would work: take an extremely massive cylinder made of 4,000-pound aluminum bars and cool it down to its lowest quantum energy state. When an energetic gravitational wave passes through, it should slightly distort the cylinder, alternately stretching and squeezing it.

By monitoring the cylinder's vibrations, the researchers predict that occasional tiny "quantum jumps" in its energy could be detected – each representing the absorption or emission of a single graviton from the passing gravitational wave.

The only catch is that meaningful readings would only occur from events producing exceptionally strong gravitational waves. Thus, the researchers will need to rely on significant events like the famous 2017 neutron star collision, which should provide more than enough gravitons to have a reasonable chance of observing this effect. They also plan to use existing gravitational wave observatories to enhance detection.

"We wait until LIGO detects a passing gravitational wave and observe how it produces quantum jumps in our detector at the same time," explained Thomas Beitel, another co-author. LIGO stands for "Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory" and is currently the world's largest gravitational wave observatory.

Even with this support, the researchers acknowledge that their idea represents an extraordinary technical challenge, pushing quantum sensing to work with larger masses than ever before.

Permalink to story:

 
I rarely ever say this, but I do not believe any of this. What I believe is...

- Gravity propagates itself instantly, which cannot be attributed to any particle.
- If we try to visualize that which we do not understand, we will end up with the wrong presentation.
- The quantum effect holds the potential to observing gravity, but our interpretation of any such observation can still be completely off.
 
Last edited:
I rarely ever say this, but I do not believe any of this. What I believe is...

- Gravity propagates itself instantly, which cannot be attributed to any particle.
- If we try to visualize that which we do not understand, we will end up with the wrong presentation.
- The quantum effect holds the potential to observing gravity, but our interpretation of any such observation can still be completely off.
I could not agree more, gravity is not determined by any particle,even a quantum one, it is a result of atomic agglomeration as a product of electric and magnetic interactions. Or I believe so. One can only observe the results of large masses interacting, at a atomic level it is obscured by other forces involved .
 
Obviously no one alive can definitively say whether or not gravitons or any of that are actually how things work, but the idea that gravitation propagates itself instantaneously doesn't make much sense to me.
 
Obviously no one alive can definitively say whether or not gravitons or any of that are actually how things work, but the idea that gravitation propagates itself instantaneously doesn't make much sense to me.
Think about it - galaxies are formed around black holes that cause all matter to spiral around them. The size of galaxies can be millions of light years across. It would make no sense to even suggest that the speed of light is in any way relevant here, as the gravitational force needs to propagate through such vast space and remain potent, it needs not just to be tremendously faster than anything known in the universe, but rather infinitely fast.
 
Obviously no one alive can definitively say whether or not gravitons or any of that are actually how things work, but the idea that gravitation propagates itself instantaneously doesn't make much sense to me.
There is no way for your to determine no one alive can definitively say how gravity works. I could explain to you how gravity works from the smallest unit to the largest, where it originates from, why it is consistant, and what it does and does not apply to and likely any other question you could possibly think of. BUT; "If your good at something never do it for free" -the Joker
 
Think about it - galaxies are formed around black holes that cause all matter to spiral around them. The size of galaxies can be millions of light years across. It would make no sense to even suggest that the speed of light is in any way relevant here, as the gravitational force needs to propagate through such vast space and remain potent, it needs not just to be tremendously faster than anything known in the universe, but rather infinitely fast.
I am as layman as it gets in this subject, so, fair warning. I am very excited about space, though. From the bunch of documentaries, YouTube videos and articles that I've read, it seems to be the case, that galaxies are not held together by the black hole in the centre. What I want to say is, the black hole is the effect not the cause of the galaxies' being tightly packed. It seems DARK MATTER is to blame for galaxies' shapes and configuration in space. But the hell do I know, so feel free to tell me to f off.
 
It seems to me, and I'm no physicist so take with the proverbial grain, that either a mass-possessing object continually pumps out trillions of these 'gravitons' in all directions, in which case assuming the particles possess either mass or energy themselves (ie exist), the object should shrink and eventually disappear unless there is some sort of 100% lossless absorption and recycling mechanism, which sounds dubious, or two objects only exchange gravitons because they 'know' each other exists, which sounds like magic, or there's no such thing.
 
I am as layman as it gets in this subject, so, fair warning. I am very excited about space, though. From the bunch of documentaries, YouTube videos and articles that I've read, it seems to be the case, that galaxies are not held together by the black hole in the centre. What I want to say is, the black hole is the effect not the cause of the galaxies' being tightly packed. It seems DARK MATTER is to blame for galaxies' shapes and configuration in space. But the hell do I know, so feel free to tell me to f off.
If that were the case, galaxies wouldn't appear spiral around the center, they would be just a random cluster around it.
 
Gravity acting instantaneously is totally 100% false. There are simple ways to prove that. The science journals get all sorts of wacky ideas every day riving Einstein was wrong or quantum mechancs, or ....

The fact gravity waves exist and travel at the speed of light shows the fallacy in the argument. We've observed light and gravity waves from neutron star merger 100 million light years away that arrived within 2s of each other.

Instantaneous gravity would cause all sorts of causal effects and make a mockery of General relativity. QFT has proven the speed of light is the upper limit for all forces and particles in nature.
 
If that were the case, galaxies wouldn't appear spiral around the center, they would be just a random cluster around it.

Yeah, that argument makes sense, but only if we assume we know how this mysterious dark matter functions.

A black hole in the centre with such a gravitational pull, that it forces all the matter to spiral around and into it.

It would be natural to assume that that is the way things work generally, but if there's anything that nature has revealed to us, it is the fact that depending on scale things go weird. It happens when things are super tiny, and it may turn out to be the case when things are super large, like galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Take the example of the solar system. Our sun is aparently 99.86% of the total mass of our entire solar system. It would stand to reason that it would have a profound effect on the celestial bodies around it. Now, look at our galaxy. Sagittarius A* is roughly 4 million solar masses large. By the most modest estimates there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy. A simple division gives us 0.04 percent of the total mass, and that's probably strongly understating it.

But then again, I know nothing and all of what I said assumes black holes work the same as "normal" objects, like the sun, for example, so yeah.
 
Lots of theories and ideas but ultimately are sensitivity in gravity research is at the very early stages and extremally low for what is required to further are understanding.

I do like this guy approach however, its an experiment none the less which is always better then doing nothing and often in the pursuit of new knowledge other phenomenon might be observed.

Gravity = omni-dynamic polymorphic subatomic matrix
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that argument makes sense, but only if we assume we know how this mysterious dark matter functions.

A black hole in the centre with such a gravitational pull, that it forces all the matter to spiral around and into it.

It would be natural to assume that that is the way things work generally, but if there's anything that nature has revealed to us, it is the fact that depending on scale things go weird. It happens when things are super tiny, and it may turn out to be the case when things are super large, like galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Take the example of the solar system. Our sun is aparently 99.86% of the total mass of our entire solar system. It would stand to reason that it would have a profound effect on the celestial bodies around it. Now, look at our galaxy. Sagittarius A* is roughly 4 million solar masses large. By the most modest estimates there are 100 billion stars in our galaxy. A simple division gives us 0.04 percent of the total mass, and that's probably strongly understating it.

But then again, I know nothing and all of what I said assumes black holes work the same as "normal" objects, like the sun, for example, so yeah.
You know something. Your stats are good. Gravity is currently seen as an emergent property of space-time. It will be fascinating, though, to learn if experiments show that gravitons turn out to be real, or if they stay in the realm of sci-fi.
 
As a curious kid, and you are given the formula for calculating the force of gravity on 2 bodies. Or that outer shells electrons in elements repel other nearby elements outer shells . It conjurers up questions
for repulsion - kids then saying you can't really touch things.
For gravity does a single neutron in space exert a force on a neutron a billion light years away, and how does it reconcile with quanta, heisenbugs uncertainty principle if things are not on an infinite devisable scale, but discrete points etc
How can light have no mass , but have energy , when e =mc squared etc

Anyway the only thing that seems to be instantaneous is entanglement ie as Einstein said spooky action at a distance
Fun fact most physical equations are not dependant on the arrow of time.
Yet at macro level entropy seems to always progress to a lower state, unless work done ( overall still means lower state when totality taken into account)
For the arrow of time at the quantum level , entanglement seems to also obey the arrow of time

Read a SF novel when about 13 called The Macroscope - a device that could use gravity waves to get an image of a far off object if nearly 50 years has not F'd my memory

Then again read the EE Doc Smith series with spaceships ( navy ) travelled through the ether . Clear ether was the quote of the day

As this article states gravity is a weak force, still scientists thing they can measure is at an incredibly small scale, between from memory 2 super tiny metal plates. At this scale the other forces are very powerful , though one has very small field of effect
 

Similar threads