Graviton version of FRW Spacetime

In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

Joe Wisherman wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:


In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.


You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

On Mar 3, 8:26*am, eric gisse wrote:
Joe Wisherman wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:



In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

It is the particle that is the illusion...

Mitchell Raemsch

On Mar 4, 12:26*am, eric gisse wrote:
Joe Wisherman wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:



In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

First some basic. The basic idea is that spin-2 fields in flat
spacetime can explain gravity without taking the geometric
interpretation of GR.

Here are the references.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...metrically+by#
"Is spacetime really curved? Embedded somewhere?
Message #4:
"There's a fascinating analysis due to Deser ["Self-interaction and
gauge invariance", General Relativity & Gravitation 1 (1970), 9-18;
see also his later paper "Gravity from self-interaction in a curved
background", Classical and Quantum Gravity 4 (1997), L99-L105],
summarized in part 5 of box 17.2 of Misner, Thorne, & Wheeler's book.
Quoting from that latter summary:
"The Einstein equations may be derived nongeometrically by
noting that the free, massless, spin-2 field equations
[[for a field $\phi$]]
[[...]]
whose source is the matter stress-tensor $T_{\mu\nu}$, must
actually be coupled to the \emph{total} stress-tensor,
including that of the $\phi$-field itself.
[[...]]
Consistency has therefore led us to universal coupling, which
implies the equivalence principle. It is at this point that
the geometric interpretation of general relativity arises,
since \emph{all} matter now moves in an effective Riemann space
of metric $\mathcal{g}^{\mu\nu} = \eta^{\mu\nu} + h^{\mu\nu}$.
.... [The] initial flat `background' space is no longer observable."
In other words, if you start off with a spin-2 field which lives on a
flat "background" spacetime, and say that its source term should
include
the field energy, you wind up with the original "background"
spacetime
being *unobservable in principle*, i.e. no possible observation can
detect it. Rather, *all* observations will now detect the effective
Riemannian space (which is what the usual geometric interpretation of
general relativity posits from the beginning)."
******
See also the starting lines at : http://www.scribd.com/doc/81449908/F...time-Gravitons
5. Einstein's geometrodynamics viewed as the standard field theory
for
a field of spin 2 in an "unobservable flat spacetime" background
(body of arguments)
ending at
"
....[The] initial flat 'background' space is no longer observable." In
other words, this approach to Einstein's field equation can be
summarized as "curvature without curvature" or - equally well - as
"flat spacetime without flat spacetime"!"

----------------------------
If you have studied the above already, then I'll ask this:

From the above. How does one decompose the FRW Expanding Universe into
spin-2 field + flat
spacetime? Remember Wheeler mentioned the FRW Universe is covered by
harmonic coordinates and all harmonic coordinates can be modelled as
spin-2 field + flat spacetime = curved spacetime.

Joe Wisherman wrote in
:

[snip]

No. You do not understand.

The spin-2 decomposition only works in weak field solutions to the field
equations, which explicitly excludes FRW manifolds except when the
difference between it and Minkowski spacetime is very, very small.

The theory *DOES NOT WORK*. That's why it has largely been abandoned. You
cannot directly quantize general relativity.

Learn why science has not gone down the road before wandering down it
yourself.

On 04/03/2012 1:36 AM, Joe Wisherman wrote:
On Mar 4, 12:26 am, eric wrote:
Joe wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:



In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

First some basic. The basic idea is that spin-2 fields in flat
spacetime can explain gravity without taking the geometric
interpretation of GR.

The graviton is wishful thinking, and therefore by extension, for the
same reason, SUSY and Superstring theory are also wishful thinking.

Yousuf Khan

On Mar 6, 9:07*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 04/03/2012 1:36 AM, Joe Wisherman wrote:





On Mar 4, 12:26 am, eric *wrote:
Joe *wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:

In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

First some basic. The basic idea is that spin-2 fields in flat
spacetime can explain gravity without taking the geometric
interpretation of GR.

The graviton is wishful thinking, and therefore by extension, for the
same reason, SUSY and Superstring theory are also wishful thinking.

* * * * Yousuf Khan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why do we wish more nonsense that detracts from Einstein's achievment?
What new problems are solved by particles of force?
I say throw the particles in the garbage and use continuous fields
for force. The speed limit in the universe is also the force limit.
Force continuity.

Mitchell Raemsch

On Mar 6, 10:21*pm, "
wrote:
On Mar 6, 9:07*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:



On 04/03/2012 1:36 AM, Joe Wisherman wrote:

On Mar 4, 12:26 am, eric *wrote:
Joe *wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:

In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

First some basic. The basic idea is that spin-2 fields in flat
spacetime can explain gravity without taking the geometric
interpretation of GR.

The graviton is wishful thinking, and therefore by extension, for the
same reason, SUSY and Superstring theory are also wishful thinking.

* * * * Yousuf Khan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why do we wish more nonsense that detracts from Einstein's achievment?
What new problems are solved by particles of force?
I say throw the particles in the garbage and use continuous fields
for force. The speed limit in the universe is also the force limit.
Force continuity.

Mitchell Raemsch

i think yoda said that.
something about the ultimate resolution of our universe.

holog

On Mar 11, 1:19*am, holog wrote:
On Mar 6, 10:21*pm, "
wrote:





On Mar 6, 9:07*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:

On 04/03/2012 1:36 AM, Joe Wisherman wrote:

On Mar 4, 12:26 am, eric *wrote:
Joe *wrote in news:7fe8f271-9af7-4366-
:

In quantum theory with gravitons, Spacetime curvature is just an
illusion, what we really have are spin 2 particles and fields in flat
Spacetime. So to those familiar with this concept. How do you
decompose the curved Spacetime of FRW model into a flat one with spin
2 fields? And how does it expand? Thanks.

You don't.

The theory does not work, which is why we don't have a quantum theory of
gravitation.

First some basic. The basic idea is that spin-2 fields in flat
spacetime can explain gravity without taking the geometric
interpretation of GR.

The graviton is wishful thinking, and therefore by extension, for the
same reason, SUSY and Superstring theory are also wishful thinking.

* * * * Yousuf Khan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Why do we wish more nonsense that detracts from Einstein's achievment?
What new problems are solved by particles of force?
I say throw the particles in the garbage and use continuous fields
for force. The speed limit in the universe is also the force limit.
Force continuity.

Mitchell Raemsch

i think yoda said that.
something about the ultimate resolution of our universe.

holog- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The idea of the graviton is going backward in the guise of getting
better than Einstein.

Mithcell Raemsch