What Should We Name the Mathematical Quantity and Physical Object of Spacetime?

  • Thread starter Antonio Lao
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Spacetime
In summary, the mathematical quantity for describing spacetime is called "stor" and the physical object detectable in experiments is called "ston." These names are similar to other mathematical and subatomic particle names ending in "or" and "on," respectively. However, alternative names such as "spacetor," "spacetensor," "spaciton," or "spacicle" could also be considered. The final decision may benefit from feedback and suggestions from other scientists. Thank you for initiating this thought-provoking conversation.
  • #1
Antonio Lao
1,440
1
The mathematical quantity for the description of an atom of spacetime will be called [itex]stor[/itex]. This is analogous to vector, tensor, spinor, twistor, and phasor. All these quantities end in "or" and the 'st" stands for spacetime.

The physical object which can be hoped of being detectable by experiment of spacetime will be called [itex]ston[/itex]. This is analogous to electron, proton, neutron, baryon, meson, gluon, fermion, and boson. All these names end on "on."

Opening to suggestion, can anyone comes up with better sounding names?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2


Hello,

Thank you for your interesting post. I appreciate your efforts to find a fitting name for the mathematical quantity and physical object of spacetime.

In terms of the mathematical quantity, I think "stor" is a suitable choice as it clearly references spacetime and fits in with other mathematical quantities ending in "or." However, I would suggest considering other options such as "spacetor" or "spacetensor," which may better convey the idea of spacetime being a multidimensional entity.

As for the physical object, I think "ston" is a good choice as it is simple and memorable. However, if you are open to suggestions, I would propose "spaciton" or "spacicle," which also incorporate the word "space" and have a similar ending to other subatomic particles.

Overall, the names you have suggested are fitting and creative. I would encourage you to continue exploring other options and possibly seeking feedback from other scientists in the field. Thank you for sparking this interesting discussion.
 

FAQ: What Should We Name the Mathematical Quantity and Physical Object of Spacetime?

What is atomization of spacetime?

Atomization of spacetime is a theory that suggests that at the most fundamental level, space and time are not continuous, but rather made up of discrete, tiny units. This idea is similar to the concept of atoms in matter, where matter is made up of discrete, indivisible units.

How does atomization of spacetime relate to quantum mechanics?

Atomization of spacetime is closely related to the principles of quantum mechanics, which describe the behavior of subatomic particles. In both theories, the idea of discreteness and indivisible units is fundamental. Quantum mechanics also suggests that space and time are not absolute, but rather can be affected by the presence of matter and energy.

What evidence supports atomization of spacetime?

Currently, there is no direct evidence to support atomization of spacetime. However, some theories in quantum gravity, such as loop quantum gravity and causal dynamical triangulation, incorporate the idea of discrete spacetime units. Additionally, the phenomenon of quantum jitter, where particles seem to randomly fluctuate in and out of existence, is often cited as evidence for the discreteness of spacetime.

How does atomization of spacetime impact our understanding of the universe?

If atomization of spacetime is true, it would challenge our traditional understanding of space and time as continuous and absolute. It could also have implications for the unification of quantum mechanics and general relativity, as well as the concept of the Big Bang and the beginning of the universe.

Are there any practical applications of atomization of spacetime?

The idea of atomization of spacetime is still a theoretical concept and has not yet been proven or applied in any practical way. However, if it is confirmed, it could potentially lead to new technologies and understanding of the fundamental laws of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
35
Views
8K
Replies
18
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top