Worm Holes and gravitational microlensing

[eggchess]

Would astrophysicists be able to locate the end of a worm hole using gravitational microlensing? I strongly suspect the answer is yes, but any "how" methodologies you could toss in would be helpful.

 

[pines-demon]

Would astrophysicists be able to locate the end of a worm hole using gravitational microlensing?

What is the motivation for this question? What is your physical model in mind? In PF you have to show some effort before asking something.

 

[javisot20]

The question starts from assuming that wormholes exist in nature, wich is not true today.

 

[DaveC426913]

What is the motivation for this question? What is your physical model in mind? In PF you have to show some effort before asking something.

The question starts from assuming that wormholes exist in nature, wich is not true today.

While true, the forum does have "-fi" and "fantasy" right in the title.

 

[pines-demon]

Well, it is sci-fi and fantasy ...

Oh right what are the rules of this forum? Can I just postulate that you will feel an inversion of the gluon beam polarity?

 

[berkeman]

Oh right what are the rules of this forum? Can I just postulate that you will feel an inversion of the gluon beam polarity?

The forum-specific rules for each forum (if they are different from the general PF rules) are stickied at the top of each respective forum. This thread may currently be in the wrong Sci-Fi specific forum, but we'll have to figure that out.

Here are the rules for the Sci-Fi Fantasy forum:

This forum is ONLY for the discussion of existing science fiction and fantasy stories in movies, books, tv, comics. It is NOT for discussing personal ideas, those would go in the Science fiction WRITING forum if they adhere to the rules for that forum.

This forum is not for new ideas or projects, it is for discussion of existing fiction works ONLY. Any post not discussing existing works will be moved or deleted.

The global guidelines are still in effect. This applies in particular to the forbidden topic list: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3929007&postcount=2 Any obvious crackpottery and links to crackpot sites will be deleted.

And here are the somewhat different rules for the Sci-Fi Writing forum:

In this forum, it is possible for writers to ask for help with science-fiction or fantasy stories. Since science-fiction is speculative in nature, some degree of speculation is allowed here. However:

There can be no speculation about the real world and about known science. Rather, all speculative theories must be about a world which is different (although similar) from our own. Writers must give some kind of indication in what way their world is different from our world.

Discussions of the internal workings of a fictional universe are allowed but any attempt to discuss speculative fiction ideas with regard to the real world is not. For example: discussing the pros/cons/handwavium of a fictional technology with regards to a plot is perfectly ok but asking how such technology could be built in the real world and what the ramifications would be is not. This is a grey area and mentors reserve the right to close a thread when they think it violates this rule.

Members are advised to particularly take care during the discusson of near-future and hard science fiction; ensure a clear distinction between real science and speculative fiction. Personal theories are strictly not allowed.

The global guidelines are still in effect. This applies in particular to the forbidden topic list: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3929007&postcount=2 Any obvious crackpottery and links to crackpot sites will be deleted.

For those members interested in writing their story without member input, please use one of the two thread prefixes when creating your thread.

 

[DaveC426913]

Oh right what are the rules of this forum? Can I just postulate that you will feel an inversion of the gluon beam polarity?

And to be pedantic, wormholes are a skosh more grounded than mere techno-babble.

 

[eggchess]

What is the motivation for this question? What is your physical model in mind? In PF you have to show some effort before asking something.

Sorry. I'm working on a science fiction story. I realize worm holes don't exist, or at least haven't been found yet. I suppose my question is, IF one were discovered, would it be reasonable that it might be discovered by gravitational lensing? Also, if my question offends the rules of this forum, then please just delete it. Thanks

 

[DaveC426913]

... if my question offends the rules of this forum, then please just delete it. Thanks

No. you're good. I imagine the mods will move it to the Writing subsubforum. If not, report your post and ask.

Questions:

• What research have you done about (theoretical) wormholes that might point toward gravitational lensing as a signature? eg.: are they particularly massive?
• How massive might they need to be to bend light paths enough to be practically observerable by accident?
• Can we use black holes as erstwhile stand-ins - perhaps due to similar mass/density curvature properties - for the sake of back-of-napkin analysis?
• How hard do you want your science fiction to be? Is it sufficient to declare by fiat that "wormholes bend spacetime enough to be detectable by microlensing effects" and have your audience give it their blessing?

 

[pines-demon]

And to be pedantic, wormholes are a skosh more grounded than mere techno-babble.

So is this more like a hard magic forum?

 

[berkeman]

I'm working on a science fiction story.

Thread moved to the Sc-Fi Writing forum.

So is this more like a hard magic forum?

That is my impression for the Sci-Fi Writing forum.

 

[DaveC426913]

So is this more like a hard magic forum?

I'm not sure if you're just funning around but - for the benefit the OP, who is legit struggling with whether it's OK to post their questions here - it is worth clarifying. To-wit:

It's quite a stretch from "we don't see them in nature" to "magic".

Wormholes are a valid, mathematically rigorous solution to Einstein's General relativistic equations. That's not magic.

"inversion of the gluon beam polarity" is word salad.

 

[berkeman]

And to add to the confusion, the OP is not the one doing the Sci-Fi Writing. This is confusing...

 

[pines-demon]

Wormholes are a valid, mathematically rigorous solution to Einstein's General relativistic equations. That's not magic.

What about "locate the end of a worm hole using gravitational microlensing"? OP should be more explicit and develop his ideas before we can speculate on the logic.

 

[javisot20]

Does anyone provide a quick definition of wormhole to address the question in the thread? (I only know the modern point of view, entanglement is a quantum correlation in the properties of certain particles detectable in experimental data, the wormhole is essentially the same but with complete regions of space-time and their content, a "dictionary" that allows you to translate notions between regions, which for simplicity is constructed assuming that these regions are black holes)

 

[pines-demon]

Does anyone provide a quick definition of wormhole to address the question in the thread? (I only know the modern point of view, entanglement is a quantum correlation in the properties of certain particles detectable in experimental data, the wormhole is essentially the same but with complete regions of space-time and their content, a "dictionary" that allows you to translate notions between regions, which for simplicity is constructed assuming that these regions are black holes)

This does not sound like a like classical wormholes, it sounds more like the EP=EPR which is mostly analogies.

 

[javisot20]

This does not sound like a like classical wormholes, it sounds more like the EP=EPR which is mostly analogies.

It may be, almost all the information about wormholes that I know comes from Maldacena's talks.

 

[Ibix]

The OP's question is too broad to really answer. You'd have to write down a solution for a wormhole with the properties you have in mind and then assess that. Different spacetimes likely have different properties.

Wikipedia's article on Ellis' wormhole solution says light paths curve near it, and my recollection of the last time we talked about it is that the article is fairly good.

However, even with a chosen solution the answer will depend on measurement sensitivity and being lucky enough to have the wormhole near something you can see being lensed. So even if it's possible in principle, it depends how far away you are and how much effort you put into it and some luck.

Unless this is ridiculously hard SF (in which case you need to do a lot of maths), I'd just decide if you want to be able to detect it or not and go with that. You can justify either answer by claiming that the wormhole solution in question does/does not create significant gravitational lensing.

 

[DaveC426913]

What about "locate the end of a worm hole using gravitational microlensing"? OP should be more explicit and develop his ideas before we can speculate on the logic.

I don't understand; that's the idea he's asking for some advice on.

 

[DaveC426913]

Wikipedia's article on Ellis' wormhole solution says light paths curve near it,

Then there's the OP's answer: yes.

 

[Ibix]

Then there's the OP's answer: yes.

No, the Ellis wormhole is an eternal wormhole in an otherwise empty universe, and a realistic one (especially if it's a temporary one used for travel) might be quite different. And it has surprising properties, like you can hang in freefall above it - it doesn't have gravity in a conventional sense.

So it's a plausibility argument at best.

 

[pines-demon]

It may be, almost all the information about wormholes that I know comes from Maldacena's talks.

This is like learning Newtonian mechanics from general relativity conferences.

 

[javisot20]

This is like learning Newtonian mechanics from general relativity conferences.

Maldacena proposed ER=EPR (with Susskind) but knows ER. He usually talks about wormholes in classical terms. But a wormhole in classical terms is what he calls "sci-fi wormhole", they don't exist, they imply FTL and retrocausality.




To respect the "science fiction" theme, the OP should assume a classic and non-existent wormhole. If it assumes a realistic description and we are also able to respond to it, this would not be science fiction.

 

[pines-demon]

Maldacena proposed ER=EPR (with Susskind) but knows ER. He usually talks about wormholes in classical terms. But a wormhole in classical terms is what he calls "sci-fi wormhole", they don't exist, they imply FTL and retrocausality.

Again, learning wormholes from Maldacena talks is like learning to drive from Formula 1 competitions. Formula 1 drivers do know how to drive casually on the street and might give you some advice but it that's far from being the best strategy.

 

[javisot20]

Again, learning wormholes from Maldacena talks is like learning to drive from Formula 1 competitions. Formula 1 drivers do know how to drive casually on the street and might give you some advice but it that's far from being the best strategy.

The classical wormholes you mention do not exist. It is also not logical to assume that Maldacena does not speak or know about wormholes in a classical context.

 

[pines-demon]

The classical wormholes you mention do not exist.

Nor any other, as far as we know.

It is also not logical to assume that Maldacena does not speak or know about wormholes in a classical context.

He knows, Formula 1 drivers know how to drive casually on the street too, that's not the point. I am just saying that conferences and recent conjectures are not the best way to learn about a decades-old concept.

 

[javisot20]

Nor any other, as far as we know.

The classic one we can assure does not exist, the rest we don't know.

He knows, Formula 1 drivers know how to drive casually on the street too, that's not the point. I am just saying that conferences and recent conjectures are not the best way to learn about a decades-old concept.

There is freedom to follow incorrect ideas from decades ago, of course.

 

[pines-demon]

The classic one we can assure does not exist, the rest we don't know.

This is the scifi writing forum, so it is to OP to say what is relevant here.

 

[javisot20]

This is the scifi writing forum, so it is to OP to say what is relevant here.

To respect the "science fiction" theme, the OP should assume a classic and non-existent wormhole. If it assumes a realistic description and we are also able to respond to it, this would not be science fiction.

 

[eggchess]

My thanks to all who have responded. Obviously, I'm a writer, not a physicists, and obviously, my question needs to be restated. I've finished one novel about a 4 ft diameter black hole coming through the solar system (Dragon's Eye Black Hole) At the ending, the black hole is leaving the solar system when it begins to act as though its being controlled, and reverses directions. Just starting the sequel novel now, outlining. I'm considering involving a wormhole.
So, this question relates to travers-able (sci-fi) wormholes. To restate: IF there were a wormhole in the general vicinity of our solar system, how might astrophysicists go about detecting it? I presume they aren't visible. I watched Juan Maldacena's video and he suggested "they might give off 'signals' which could be searched for." Signals? Any theories you can toss out could be helpful. Again, thank.

 

[javisot20]

You could take the Morris-Thorne wormhole, but it's a vacuum solution... like all of them (I think). At that point you should be lax if you want to write the novel.

M. S. Morris and K. S. Thorne, “Wormholes in spacetime and their use
for interstellar travel: A tool for teaching General Relativity”, Am. J.
Phys. 56, 395 (1988).

https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0302049

Now that I think about it, have you considered copying the movie Interstellar at certain points? It is a good reference for what you are looking for