Newton's theory is highly accurate; that is until you approach velocities close to c, intense gravitational fields, etc. In those cases, a more general theory is needed. Welcome Einstein...

Einstein's theory is highly accurate; that is until you approach distance scales in the molecular to atomic range, infinite graviational warping (like at a singularity), and other tight spaces. In those cases, a more general theory is needed. Welcome Edward Witten, Von Neuman, Lee Smolin, Rovelli, and a handful of others...

Now the phrase of the day seems to be "quantum spin network", whereby spacetime is quantized and volume is NOT infinitely divisible. The geometry of spacetime on the grand scale adheres accurately to the famous GR equations, but localy, (HIGHLY LOCALY), these equations break down. Perhaps because space is no different than from particles; only space behaves as if it were VERY WEAKLY interacting, hence it doesn't obstruct the path of its more familiar "physical" counterparts. The universe is one giant spinning particle whereby some parts of it remain "pointed out of the way" (in directions perpendicular to our familiar 3-axes). (Is that the correct plural spelling of "axis"?)

Perhaps Einstein's dream will ultimately someday be realized as it is very much alive today: that all matter, space, and time, are one and the same - GEOMETRIC orientations of the same "stuff".

GR unifies space and time, perhaps the GUT (grand unified theory) will coin a new term: matterspacetime.

• ...that was a dumb mistake in the title... - smartguy - February 23, 2003 - 21:31 UTC
• I agree-Space can become particles - yanniru - February 24, 2003 - 08:49 UTC