Why does the LIGO observation disprove higher dimensions?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I recently read this article which claims that last year’s LIGO observation of gravitational waves is proof that, at least on massive scales, there cannot be more than three spatial dimensions.



I don’t understand the physics fully, so could someone please explain this to me? I know it’s been theorized that gravity is relatively weak when compared to other forces because it leeches into other dimensions, and I think I understand how these observations disprove that, but how does this prove that there must be three and only three spatial dimensions?






gravity gravitational-waves spacetime-dimensions







share|cite|improve this question

















  • 1




    Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
    – enumaris
    4 hours ago















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












I recently read this article which claims that last year’s LIGO observation of gravitational waves is proof that, at least on massive scales, there cannot be more than three spatial dimensions.



I don’t understand the physics fully, so could someone please explain this to me? I know it’s been theorized that gravity is relatively weak when compared to other forces because it leeches into other dimensions, and I think I understand how these observations disprove that, but how does this prove that there must be three and only three spatial dimensions?






gravity gravitational-waves spacetime-dimensions







share|cite|improve this question

















  • 1




    Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
    – enumaris
    4 hours ago













up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











I recently read this article which claims that last year’s LIGO observation of gravitational waves is proof that, at least on massive scales, there cannot be more than three spatial dimensions.



I don’t understand the physics fully, so could someone please explain this to me? I know it’s been theorized that gravity is relatively weak when compared to other forces because it leeches into other dimensions, and I think I understand how these observations disprove that, but how does this prove that there must be three and only three spatial dimensions?






gravity gravitational-waves spacetime-dimensions







share|cite|improve this question













I recently read this article which claims that last year’s LIGO observation of gravitational waves is proof that, at least on massive scales, there cannot be more than three spatial dimensions.



I don’t understand the physics fully, so could someone please explain this to me? I know it’s been theorized that gravity is relatively weak when compared to other forces because it leeches into other dimensions, and I think I understand how these observations disprove that, but how does this prove that there must be three and only three spatial dimensions?






gravity gravitational-waves spacetime-dimensions




gravity gravitational-waves spacetime-dimensions






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked 5 hours ago









DonielF

1216




1216







  • 1




    Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
    – enumaris
    4 hours ago













  • 1




    Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
    – enumaris
    4 hours ago








1




1




Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
– enumaris
4 hours ago





Perhaps this previous question I asked and the answer therein would provide a little illumination (the question is regarding the same paper): physics.stackexchange.com/q/428790
– enumaris
4 hours ago











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













I’m the lead author of the paper. Thanks for being interested in the work! Your question is a good one. Really, our work can’t say anything about extra spatial dimensions if they’re not doing anything to gravity or light. As you correctly mention, we can only constrain higher dimensions where gravity is actually leaking into them.



If there are higher dimensions, but our physics experiments can’t see or hear them, are they really there? :p (this isn’t to say there might not be other ways of detecting extra spatial dimensions — but really, if they aren’t affecting physics in any measurable way, there’s not much we can say)






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • welcome, kris!!
    – niels nielsen
    6 mins ago










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f431010%2fwhy-does-the-ligo-observation-disprove-higher-dimensions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
4
down vote













I’m the lead author of the paper. Thanks for being interested in the work! Your question is a good one. Really, our work can’t say anything about extra spatial dimensions if they’re not doing anything to gravity or light. As you correctly mention, we can only constrain higher dimensions where gravity is actually leaking into them.



If there are higher dimensions, but our physics experiments can’t see or hear them, are they really there? :p (this isn’t to say there might not be other ways of detecting extra spatial dimensions — but really, if they aren’t affecting physics in any measurable way, there’s not much we can say)






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • welcome, kris!!
    – niels nielsen
    6 mins ago














up vote
4
down vote













I’m the lead author of the paper. Thanks for being interested in the work! Your question is a good one. Really, our work can’t say anything about extra spatial dimensions if they’re not doing anything to gravity or light. As you correctly mention, we can only constrain higher dimensions where gravity is actually leaking into them.



If there are higher dimensions, but our physics experiments can’t see or hear them, are they really there? :p (this isn’t to say there might not be other ways of detecting extra spatial dimensions — but really, if they aren’t affecting physics in any measurable way, there’s not much we can say)






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

















  • welcome, kris!!
    – niels nielsen
    6 mins ago












up vote
4
down vote










up vote
4
down vote









I’m the lead author of the paper. Thanks for being interested in the work! Your question is a good one. Really, our work can’t say anything about extra spatial dimensions if they’re not doing anything to gravity or light. As you correctly mention, we can only constrain higher dimensions where gravity is actually leaking into them.



If there are higher dimensions, but our physics experiments can’t see or hear them, are they really there? :p (this isn’t to say there might not be other ways of detecting extra spatial dimensions — but really, if they aren’t affecting physics in any measurable way, there’s not much we can say)






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









I’m the lead author of the paper. Thanks for being interested in the work! Your question is a good one. Really, our work can’t say anything about extra spatial dimensions if they’re not doing anything to gravity or light. As you correctly mention, we can only constrain higher dimensions where gravity is actually leaking into them.



If there are higher dimensions, but our physics experiments can’t see or hear them, are they really there? :p (this isn’t to say there might not be other ways of detecting extra spatial dimensions — but really, if they aren’t affecting physics in any measurable way, there’s not much we can say)







share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer






New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 2 hours ago









kris

411




411




New contributor




kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






kris is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











  • welcome, kris!!
    – niels nielsen
    6 mins ago
















  • welcome, kris!!
    – niels nielsen
    6 mins ago















welcome, kris!!
– niels nielsen
6 mins ago




welcome, kris!!
– niels nielsen
6 mins ago

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f431010%2fwhy-does-the-ligo-observation-disprove-higher-dimensions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest
































































Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What does second last employer means? [closed]

Image
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP .everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0; up vote -3 down vote favorite Say, for example I have worked in the following companies, Company A => 2010 - 2011 Company B => 2011 - 2012 Company C => 2012 - Till Date Company D => Have offer Now assume Company D is asking to submit documents from my second last employer. So from the list of companies given, which company would be qualified as second last employer? software-industry employer share | improve this question asked Aug 10 '14 at 5:16 Rajaprabhu Aravindasamy 559 1 6 13 closed as off-topic by Jim G., jmort253 ♦ Aug 11 '14 at 1:58 This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason: "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address...
Read more

List of Gilmore Girls characters

Image
The season three cast—(Back row): Lane, Michel, Paris, Emily, Richard, Sookie, Miss Patty, Kirk; Front row: Jess, Luke, Lorelai, Rory, Dean This is a list of characters for the comedy-drama television series Gilmore Girls . Contents 1 Main characters 1.1 Lorelai Gilmore 1.2 Rory Gilmore 1.3 Sookie St. James 1.4 Lane Kim 1.5 Michel Gerard 1.6 Luke Danes 1.7 Emily Gilmore 1.8 Richard Gilmore 1.9 Paris Geller 1.10 Dean Forester 1.11 Jess Mariano 1.12 Kirk Gleason 1.13 Jason Stiles 1.14 Logan Huntzberger 2 Major recurring characters 2.1 Christopher Hayden 2.2 Jackson Belleville 2.3 Mrs. Kim 2.4 Tristin DuGray 2.5 Max Medina 2.6 Taylor Doose 2.7 Dave Rygalski 2.8 Marty 3 Recurring characters 3.1 Stars Hollow 3.2 Chilton 3.3 Yale 3.4 Other 4 Notable guest stars 5 Unseen characters 6 Notes 7 References Main characters Actor Character Appearances Season 1 Season 2 Season 3 Season 4 Season 5 Season 6 Season 7 A Year in the Life Lauren Graham Lorelai Gilmore...
Read more

Confectionery

Image
Prepared foods made with a lot of sugar or other cabohydrates "Sweetmeat" redirects here. For the racehorse, see Sweetmeat (horse). Not to be confused with Sweetbread. This Kransekake is a traditional Scandinavian baker's confection. Confectionery is the art of making confections , which are food items that are rich in sugar and carbohydrates. Exact definitions are difficult. [1] In general, though, confectionery is divided into two broad and somewhat overlapping categories, bakers' confections and sugar confections. [2] Bakers' confectionery, also called flour confections , includes principally sweet pastries, cakes, and similar baked goods. Sugar confectionery includes candies ( sweets in British English), candied nuts, chocolates, chewing gum, bubble gum, pastillage, and other confections that are made primarily of sugar. In some cases, chocolate confections (confections made of chocolate) are treated as a separate category, as are sugar-free versions of ...
Read more