Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe
    Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe
    Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe
    Audiobook10 hours

    Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe

    Written by Jim Baggott

    Narrated by Nigel Patterson

    4.5/5

    ()

    About this audiobook

    Today we are blessed with two extraordinarily successful theories of physics. The first is Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity, which describes the large-scale behavior of matter in a curved spacetime. The second is quantum mechanics. This theory describes the properties and behavior of matter and radiation at their smallest scales.

    But, while they are both highly successful, these two structures leave a lot of important questions unanswered. They are also based on two different interpretations of space and time, and are therefore fundamentally incompatible. We have two descriptions but, as far as we know, we've only ever had one universe. What we need is a quantum theory of gravity.

    Approaches to formulating such a theory have primarily followed two paths. One leads to String Theory, which has for long been fashionable, and about which much has been written. But String Theory has become mired in problems. Combining clear discussions of both quantum theory and general relativity, this book offers one of the first efforts to explain the new quantum theory of space and time.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherTantor Media, Inc
    Release dateJul 24, 2019
    ISBN9781977368676
    Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe

    Related to Quantum Space

    Related audiobooks

    Physics For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      Is Quantum Physics Linked To Consciousness?

      Jan 16, 2021

      WHILE most of us have only heard about quantum physics by watching the Big Bang Theory, a week doing nuclear physics in matric led to a fascination for quantum physics – and whether it plays a role in the workings of the brain – for UKZN PhD student

      3 min read

    • Article

      What Keeps Black Holes From Expanding Everywhere?

      Dec 10, 2018

      Black holes are somehow able to grow constantly without changing their size. Physics might finally be able to explain why.

      4 min read

    • Article

      Even Physicists Find the Multiverse Faintly Disturbing: It’s not the immensity or inscrutability, but that it reduces physical law to happenstance.

      Jan 12, 2017

      How do you feel about the multiverse?” The question was not out of place in our impromptu dinner-table lecture, yet it caught me completely off-guard. It’s not that I’ve never been asked about the multiverse before, but explaining a theoretical const

      14 min read

    • Article

      Why Can’t Relativity And Quantum Mechanics Get Along?

      Aug 13, 2020

      This wave-particle duality is central to quantum physics. Light can be thought of as being made of particles called photons, or as a propagating electromagnetic wave. Values in quantum physics are a bit like shoes – they only come in set sizes. Physi

      1 min read

    • Article

      Will Quantum Mechanics Swallow Relativity?: The contest between gravity and quantum physics takes a new turn.

      Oct 29, 2015

      It is the biggest of problems, it is the smallest of problems. At present physicists have two separate rulebooks explaining how nature works. There is general relativity, which beautifully accounts for gravity and all of the things it dominates: orbi

      17 min read

    • Article

      Will Quantum Mechanics Swallow Relativity?

      Jun 8, 2017

      It is the biggest of problems, it is the smallest of problems. At present physicists have two separate rulebooks explaining how nature works. There is general relativity, which beautifully accounts for gravity and all of the things it dominates: orbi

      17 min read

    • Article

      Infinite Garbage Can: Can information ever be rescued from inside a black hole?

      Nov 21, 2013

      String theorist Vijay Balasubramanian grapples with the garbage cans of the universe: black holes. His research on particle physics at the University of Pennsylvania and The City University of New York Graduate Center questions the apparent loss of i

      4 min read

    • Article

      Secrets Of Gravity

      Feb 22, 2024

      Secrets Of Gravity
      9 min read

    • Article

      The THEORY of EVERYTHING

      Jun 20, 2019

      The THEORY of EVERYTHING
      6 min read

    • Article

      When Gravity Breaks Down

      Feb 15, 2019

      When Gravity Breaks Down
      5 min read

    • Article

      Jargon Buster

      Jan 19, 2024

      A black hole is an area of spacetime where the gravity is so great that nothing, not even light, can escape. Most are formed from the remnants of large stars that die in supernova explosions. These occur when a star has burned all its fuel and collap

      2 min read

    • Article

      Schrödinger’s Cat When Nobody Is Looking

      Aug 26, 2020

      Some of the most perplexing topics in physics revolve around quantum theory. The quandary is seen most famously in the Schrödinger’s cat question and the issue of information loss in black hole evaporation. Richard Feynman said, “I think that I can s

      13 min read

    • Article

      The Trouble With “The Big Bang”

      Sep 11, 2022

      Did the Big Bang happen? Has the James Webb Space Telescope found evidence against the Big Bang? If astrophysicists are sure the Big Bang happened, why do they also think the universe was born from a quantum fluctuation? And what does this have to do

      8 min read

    • Article

      Could the Universe Be Finite?

      Dec 15, 2023

      On recent estimates, the observable universe—the portion of the universe that we can detect through our telescopes—extends about 47 billion light-years in every direction. But the limit of what we can see is one thing, and the limit of what exists is

      7 min read

    • Article

      What Quantum Gravity Needs Is More Experiments

      Dec 12, 2019

      In the mid-1990s, I studied mathematics. I wasn’t really sure just what I wanted to do with my life, but I was awed by the power of mathematics to describe the natural world. After classes on differential geometry and Lie algebras, I attended a semin

      8 min read

    • Article

      What Quantum Gravity Needs Is More Experiments

      Feb 2, 2017

      In the mid-1990s, I studied mathematics. I wasn’t really sure just what I wanted to do with my life, but I was awed by the power of mathematics to describe the natural world. After classes on differential geometry and Lie algebras, I attended a semin

      8 min read

    • Article

      The Strangeness of Black Holes

      Apr 11, 2019

      This essay is one of the five winners in the 2019 writing competition held by the Black Hole Initiative at Harvard University. “The Black Hole Initiative offers a unique environment for thinking about the topic of black holes more creatively and comp

      6 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Quantum Space

    4.5/5

    39 ratings4 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 5/5
      My favorite book on physicals so far. It gives an overview of the whole history of modern physics and gives a great understanding in how these theories were formed
    • 5/5
      It’s pretty much the Bible!!! just finished 22 Time front back about to start again
    • 4/5
      The researchers faced difficulties advancing their theory because Physics has virtually given itself over to String Theory. Smolin et al kept it up, searching for the elusive graviton...
    • 5/5
      “Now, through the efforts of a number of dedicated theorists, a resolution appeared to be at hand. Remember, this was a theory [LQG] that drew all the lessons about the nature of space and time from general relativity into a structure that closely resembled a quantum field theory. It produced a set of equations that could be solved without the need for messy and tedious renormalization procedures, and whose solutions could be shown to be completely independent of any choice fo coordinate system - it was genuinely independent of any kind of spacetime background. What’s more, this was a theory founded directly on accepted , empirically tried-and-trusted structure - there had been no need to second-guess physical reality any further by introducing supersymmetries, or hidden dimensions. But any jubilation that the theorists [Smolin, Rovelli, etc.] might have experienced was shortlived. Because, just a few months before Rovelli and Smolin’s paper was published, some statements delivered to a conference by Edward Witten sparked a second revolution [String Theory].”In “Quantum Space - Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe” by Jim Baggott“M-Theory is not a theory. To this day, nobody knows what M-theory looks like, although many theorists have tinkered with structures that they believe it could or should possess.M-theory is really the presumption that there must exist a unique, eleven-dimensional superstring theory.”In “Quantum Space - Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe” by Jim BaggottFirstly, there is a limited number of top quantum/relativity scientists in the world. This fact is extremely important, because a big portion of those work on M-theory with the rest working on LQG (I’m exaggerating, but you get the gist). People argue that M-theory is so complex that you need many of the top minds working on it (are they?), BUT that actually limits the brain resources for the rest of the fields. And I do not only mean science, but also ideas that could one day lead to science.One of that majorities’ main argument is, quantum physics has hit a roadblock last 30 years, only discovered things that was more or less already expected, and only real progress come from astronomy. Well, if old experts keep saying that to young students, they are going to choose something like M-theory, and they don't want to devote their career on something that has no promise of big breakthroughs. But younger generations have often in science history come up with radical new ideas that can make a stale field move forward. Well, that might take a long time now that many of the brightest works on M-theory.And another thing. Even if M-theory can be applied to our universe(s), it looks to be a long way from science. People often say M-theory is like next centuries science, by accident discovered in the last. Well, it sure looks that way, also in terms of when it will become science. Likely not next 10 years or 50. As far as I understand, it does not even have the string equivalent of fields yet. And, with the 10^500 permutations of possible universe configurations, it’s not even sure it will ever be useful, even if does fit the world we live in.I am not saying it should be thrown away, it just vacuums too many bright minds away from other fields like LQG.As my father used to say, one step at a time, i.e., not all the steps at once, is what I vote for. Cannot force LQG on people; people should research what they feel like. Like doing more research into Grand Unified Theory (GUT), instead of trying to skip directly to Theory of everything (TOE), like M-theory. I just think it’s a problem, and a big one.Many scientist working in quantum theories, often also believe in M-theory, even though it is not the field they work in. That could also be a problem, as they might for example think, "hmm, I would not spend my time on GUT, as M-theory will be the theory on that". Which would also limit competing theories on aspects M will cover.First place to start; top m-theory experts should stop trying to paint opponents of M-theory as crackpots (I’m one of those crackpots). It's not done directly, but can often be read between the lines. And stop calling it science, until it is. I hope this gets better, so science can move forward faster. I see only one reason to stop progress, that is if the scientists suspect new insight can lead to unwanted weaponization. Like antimatter bombs or something similar that is too powerful for us to handle. Then of course scientists should find ways to prevent progress in that field. But this does not seem to be the case, so please let’s get more research diverted from M-theory into improving our current framework of nature, so we can understand dark matter/energy, and other weird empirical data from the universe.The entire basis of any 'theory of everything' is the rather presumptuous notion that what we can currently observe IS actually 'everything'. If we have actually only uncovered 1% of what exists, then we'd be in the absurd position (which I think we actually are) of trying to find an 'all-encompassing' theory that left the bulk of reality unexplained.My suspicion is that the reason why quantum theory and gravity (LQG) have yet to be unified is not for lack of mathematical geniuses but because the lack of unity suggests there is more physical reality that we have not yet arrived at. Only when we find the missing physics will we stop trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. It is true that one has the impression that science at the present cutting edge is rather theory rich and data poor. However, I suspect that this is always the case, because at the frontier of science it is usually easier to theorize than to gather and interpret data. As the frontier moves on, unsuccessful theories fall by the wayside and are forgotten. We thus suffer from a sort of historical tunnel hindsight in which we see the path that science has traversed as an obvious high road, and forget that it was usually far from obvious at the time.At the end of the day there is no problem with spinning all kinds of theories, because ultimately the facts will decide the issue. Scientists know that. There's no downside. Nobody is about to take string theory or whatever as fact and base their actions on that.Jim Baggott has written an honest book, while some String Theorists (e.g., Susskind and Greene) have fought many fights in blogsphere and exploited journalists as far as it goes. It is hilarious how they exploit quantum information to support string theory while privately, string theorists consider colleagues working with quantum information as dumb-fucks who tailor with trivial finite dimensional matrices. Esteemed Professors Susskind and Greene, don't steal others horses when your own old cow gets tired!