Spacetime: A smoother brew than we knew

[Tiki]

The near simultaneous arrival of three photons from an ancient gamma-ray-burster suggest that spacetime is smoother than thought.

What a great laboratory we all live in. Are three photons all that it takes to make Einstein right again? The peripheral details are here http://www.space.com/19202-einstein-space-time-smooth.html.

Three photons does not seem many.

[acey]

Very interesting. The implication seems to be that any "foaminess" would have to be at a scale smaller than the Planck length.

Phys.org article here:

http://phys.org/news...-brew-knew.html

Research paper here:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5191v2.pdf

[mattft]

very interesting, thanks for sharing.

[Ptarmigan]

The peripheral details are here http://www.space.com...ime-smooth.html.

Three photons does not seem many.

Thanks Tiki, very interesting.

that space.com is a secondary report,

I have not yet found my way to the Nemiroff original (ps is that the same Nemiroff who does APOD ?)

but I wonder if

the three photons ref to are just the _first_ (of many) to arrive at three coincidence detectors ??

[Ptarmigan]

Research paper here:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.5191v2.pdf

Thanks, my head hertz !

[Cath]

Can we really consider whether a theory is valid (or not) based on one occurance of 3 little photons?

[Tiki]

Can we really consider whether a theory is valid (or not) based on one occurance of 3 little photons?

Scepticism is prudent when it comes to science. I would imagine that in the first instance the experiment would need to be validated and if possible repeated. The calculation of the likelihood of a statistical fluke will also be attempted. Any theory only needs one exception to be binned.

As an aside though, I find it aesthetically pleasing that three little photons might lead to a significant step forward in our understanding of nature. Neat (perhaps).

[acey]

Can we really consider whether a theory is valid (or not) based on one occurance of 3 little photons?

No - the authors say in the abstract of their paper that this result is "suggesting that spacetime is smooth at energies near and slightly above the Planck mass". That's a long way from saying it's proved.

[ollypenrice]

Scepticism is prudent when it comes to science. I would imagine that in the first instance the experiment would need to be validated and if possible repeated. The calculation of the likelihood of a statistical fluke will also be attempted. Any theory only needs one exception to be binned.

As an aside though, I find it aesthetically pleasing that three little photons might lead to a significant step forward in our understanding of nature. Neat (perhaps).

One often reads this in discussions of philosophy of science but how true is it in reality? The more complex models, such as the BB, tend to have fixes or get-outs applied to them, or they have aspects of themselves 'put on hold' rather than being binned. Don't you think? I'm only an armchair cosmologist (as opposed to one who has actually entered to cosmic fireball for a good nose around. )

Olly

[symesie04]

I think that any theory will advoid the refuse collection regardless of flaws if it is currently still the most credible theory we have. If two theories have equal merits then one is shown to have exceptions it will quickly fall out of favour.