Paper detail

Thoughts about a conceptual framework for relativistic gravity

I consider the isolation of general relativity research from the rest of theoretical physics during the 1930s-1950s, and the subsequent reinvigoration of the field. I suggest that the main reason for the isolation was that relativists of the time did not develop heuristic concepts about the physics of the theory with which they could communicate with other physicists, and that the revival happened when they began to develop such concepts. A powerful heuristic today is the concept of a black hole, which is a robust and stable component of many astronomical systems. During the 1930s relativists could only offer the "Schwarzschild singularity". I argue that the change occurred at least partly because key theoretical physicists schooled in quantum theory entered relativity research and began to approach problematic issues by asking questions about observable effects and the outcomes of thought experiments. The result was the development of a physical intuition about such things as black holes, which could then be communicated to non-specialists. Only then was it possible to integrate general relativity fully into the rest of physics.

preprint2012arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.