Is There a Rigorous Proof of a Quantum of Space in Quantum Mechanics and GR?

In summary, the conversation discusses the existence of a minimum length in space, known as the Planck length, and its relationship to quantum mechanics and general relativity. It is argued that this concept is derived from mathematics rather than being imposed by necessity. The conversation also touches on the limitations of current theories, such as string theory and the need for a quantized understanding of space and time in order to solve problems in quantum physics.
  • #1
lokofer
106
0
Is there a "rigorous" proof..

-That a "Quantum" of space (a minimum lenght, area or volume for any 4-dimensional Manifold) exist applying Quantum mechanics and GR?..both together or in the "Semi-classical" limit?...

- this "Planck lenght" should be obtained directly from math and never imposed by a "necessity" because if not theory would be wrong..this is why i don't believe much in "String Theory" you'll never be able to "see" (detect, prove) that there are 9+1 space-time dimensions or that "ojbects" called strings exist.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Apparently, yes. It has to do with Heisenberg uncertainty principle. I reproduced it here during another discussion; actually, it's the derivation for the quantization of time there, but from there you can conclude that a signal (which travels at c, always) cannot travel less than a Planck length, because it would need to do it in a fractionary amount of Planck times, which cannot happen.
 
  • #3
Note that the clock calculation is somewhat naive. It takes no account of how your *length* or *time* variables might change with GR and instead treats them as perfectly quantum parameters.

Lets just say the calculation is a ballpark guess at the regime where things start to break down, and where nasty GR like objects (like black holes) will tear apart usual notions of what things are like..
 
  • #4
-I don't agree much with the ¿hypothesis? [tex] \Delta E < mc^{2} [/tex] since mass can be 0, the rest i can understand..

- Then is "Space-time " is Quantizied...¿what's the problem with "Path Integrals" and GR ?..since you could apply "Regge Calculus" (Numerical methods) and solve Quantum Gravity.. for my the biggest "obstacle" in Quantum Physics was that somehow space was "continouos" so the momentum could be oo but now that Space and time are quantizied then all problems should disappear.
 

Related to Is There a Rigorous Proof of a Quantum of Space in Quantum Mechanics and GR?

1. What is a rigorous proof?

A rigorous proof is a logical and systematic explanation that demonstrates the truth of a statement or theorem. It involves using accepted rules and methods to establish the validity of a claim.

2. How can I determine if a proof is rigorous?

A rigorous proof should clearly state the assumptions, definitions, and axioms used, and provide a step-by-step explanation of how the conclusion is reached. It should also be free from logical errors and follow established mathematical or scientific principles.

3. Why is it important to have a rigorous proof?

A rigorous proof is important because it allows us to confidently accept a claim as true. It also allows for reproducibility and verification of results by others, which is crucial in the scientific community.

4. Can a proof ever be considered completely rigorous?

While a proof can be considered rigorous within a certain context or framework, it is almost impossible to prove something with absolute certainty. This is because new evidence or perspectives may emerge that challenge the validity of the proof.

5. Are there different levels of rigor in proofs?

Yes, there are different levels of rigor in proofs depending on the field of study and the complexity of the problem being solved. Generally, a proof is considered more rigorous if it has been peer-reviewed and stands up to critical analysis by experts in the field.

Similar threads

  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
2
Replies
60
Views
6K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
856
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
20
Views
8K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
28
Views
4K
Back
Top