Gravitation as curvature of space vs field theory

In summary, General relativity describes space as being curved, and this is due to the presence of matter. However, the field of gravity is not described as being composed of gravitons. Instead, it is described as a field that acts through gravitons on matter. This discrepancy between the two views needs to be reconciled through an (as yet undiscovered) quantum theory of gravity.
  • #1
rudolfbaer
2
0
Gravitation is described on one hand as curvature of space in the presence of matter.
It is also described as a field acting through gravitons on matter. How can the two views be reconciled?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
The gravitational field is not described as being composed of gravitons in any mainstream physical theory at present.

In the spirit of Weinberg, it might also be worth considering the viewpoint that the geometric aspects of general relativity are not to be taken especially literally -- it is a mathematical theory that describes the gravitational interaction in a language that happens to be geometric. In the same vein, electromagnetism can also be understood as a geometric theory (where the vector potential arises as a quantity associated with the geometry of the internal U(1) group space), but that doesn't stop us from also associating the vector potential with photons in field theory.
 
  • #3
rudolfbaer said:
Gravitation is described on one hand as curvature of space in the presence of matter.
It is also described as a field acting through gravitons on matter. How can the two views be reconciled?

Through an (as yet undiscovered) quantum theory of gravity. You'll find a number of threads in the relativity and quantum mechanics sections - for example https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=689165
 
  • #4
rudolfbaer said:
Gravitation is described on one hand as curvature of space in the presence of matter.
It is also described as a field acting through gravitons on matter. How can the two views be reconciled?

Compare to this question: Electromagnetism is described on one hand in terms of classical electric and magnetic fields. It is also described as a (quantum) field acting through (virtual and real) photons on matter. How can the two views be reconciled?
 
  • #5
Gravity viewed as curvature of spacetime is general relativity; unlike the other 'forces',
gravity is not part of the Standard Model of particle physics.


Gravity in general relativity is curved spacetime; In quantum mechanics particles are the carriers for the electromagnetic, strong and weak forces...so the hypothetical idea of a particle for gravity is called the gravitron. It's never been detected, maybe because it is so weak. But gravity seems especially unique: it curves spacetime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitons

general relativity

...does not allow any particular space-time background to be singled out as the "true" space-time background, general relativity is said to be background independent. In contrast, the Standard Model is not background independent, with Minkowski space enjoying a special status as the fixed background space-time. A theory of quantum gravity is needed in order to reconcile these differences.
 
  • #6
thanks to all, I will have to "digest" this.
 
  • #7
Don't forget the salt
 

FAQ: Gravitation as curvature of space vs field theory

1. How does the concept of "curvature of space" explain gravitation?

According to the theory of general relativity, objects with mass cause a curvature in the fabric of space-time. This curvature is what we experience as the force of gravity. Essentially, it is the mass of an object that determines the amount of curvature it causes in space-time, and the strength of gravity is directly related to this curvature.

2. How does the field theory approach differ from the concept of "curvature of space"?

In field theory, gravity is explained as a force that acts between objects with mass. This is similar to other forces, such as electromagnetism, which are described by fields that transmit the force between objects. In contrast, the curvature of space theory does not rely on a force acting between objects, but rather on the intrinsic curvature of space-time itself.

3. Which theory is currently accepted as the most accurate description of gravitation?

The theory of general relativity, which explains gravitation as the curvature of space-time, is currently the most accepted and accurate description of gravitation. It has been extensively tested and has been able to accurately predict the behavior of gravitational phenomena, such as the orbit of planets and the bending of light by massive objects.

4. Can both theories of gravitation be used to make accurate predictions?

Yes, both the curvature of space theory and the field theory approach have been able to make accurate predictions about the behavior of gravity. However, the theory of general relativity has been able to make more precise and accurate predictions, especially in extreme conditions such as near black holes or during the early stages of the universe.

5. Are there any ongoing debates or controversies surrounding these theories of gravitation?

While the theory of general relativity is widely accepted, there are ongoing debates and research surrounding it, particularly in trying to reconcile it with quantum mechanics. Additionally, some scientists are exploring alternative theories of gravitation, such as modified theories of gravity or theories that incorporate both the curvature of space and field theory approaches.

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top