• Scubus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Nah, quantum fields all rest on another dimensional layer. The quantum foam experiences a weak cohesion force that doesnt drop off with distance. This results in clustering of the foam, resulting in clustering of the deeper field. This is emergent on the macroscopic scale as the folding of space time, which is really just the tendancy of energy to condense on the quantum scale.

      Or maybe partical interactions being dependant on locality results in a sort of local energy spike as the two particles get closer. This results in time dilation between the two particles, altering the expected rate at which their interactions would occur, effectively setting a hard limit on how close two particles can get without fusing. This time dilation could also be responsible for the emergent property of gravity. Kinda like how doubling the passage of time effectively doubles the measured heat in a volume, given that heat is a measure of particle interactions per second. Twice the seconds, twice the interactions. If time gets fucky when two particals get close enough to interact, that could result in an illusionary force that emerges macroscopically as gravity.

      This is all me fucking around but i think theres maybe a nugget of legit speculation in there

        • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          My theory runs as follows:

          Take two partcles, and measure the energy found in both if them and the space between them. It is my speculation that as they get closer, the energy in the space between them raises. It follows that with higher energy in a smaller area, the curvatureof spacetime would be warped, explaining the differance in expected values between quantum and relativity.

          Basically im saying an oversight caused a math error.

          I am not a quantum physicist and i only study it as a hobby, this is almost definitely not the actual solution

          • icelimit@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            But energy is quantized. By your explanation, distance should also be quantized as a consequence.

            Or distance might not be actually quantized, just that we can’t place things in between like the pieces on a chess set.

            • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              23 hours ago

              Is distance not quantized? It was my understanding that the planc length was the “grid size” of the universal array, so to speak.

              That being said, gravity as we detect it is not confirmed to be quantized, which is where the confusion comes in. That implies that there is a fundamental factor that is non quantized, possibly with other factors that may be quantized. What I’m getting at here is that while energy is definitely quantized, gravity may be a product of energy/distance, with distance being non quantized, resulting in non quantized gravity.