• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

204 submissions , 162 unreviewed
5,024 questions , 2,178 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,686 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
815 active unimported users
More ...

  Will numerical relativity figure into either the phenomenology of quantum gravity or the construction of the theory?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

It appears as though we want to preserve, in a theory of quantum gravity, the empirical data that GR has led to (and most of its structure, the specifics depending on the theory of QG, e.g., we might rid of background independence). Given that much of that (such as the late merger for a binary black hole coalescence) is given by numerical relativity and other frameworks, will such frameworks be used for probing or constructing quantum gravity?

asked Jul 10, 2018 in Theoretical Physics by Hanguk [ no revision ]

I do not really understand your question. Numerical relativity is only "solving Einstein equations in a computer". Imagine that we knew only classical Maxwell equations and now asked an analogous question about the meaning of numerical solutions of Maxwell equations to quantum electrodynamics. The answer would be that the numerical solutions are "kind of, I guess" useful for QED, but not really. 

to claim a new theory as physics, after all the maths checks, one must show that the previous theory is an approximation of the new one and possibly that an old puzzle is now solved. Or better, he may predict a new effect. If experiments confirm it, the new theory has a great probability to become a discovery.

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights