-1
$\begingroup$

My question

Is it possible that gravitons don't exist, but are actually something like phonons?

Previous same question

Could gravitons be quasiparticles like phonons?

Of course, it is my fault that I didn't search first, but stackexchange search tab is not that visible.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

Actually I do think you have a point. Having reread both questions it's hard to argue why your question should be closed as non-mainstream while asmaier's should not.

ACuriousMind points out that asmaier's question is a little more technical. It specifically refers to a technique called linearisation and it is only in this linear form that quasiparticles like phonons are well defined. Though having said that, I'd say both questions were right on the borderline and I'd have been tempted to vote to close asmaier's question had I seen it back then.

If your question weren't a duplicate I would be tempted to vote to reopen it. If a friendly moderator had the time I'd ask them to reopen your question then close it as a duplicate if only because having duplicates can be useful when searching for questions.

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

Just because both questions contain the words "graviton" and "phonon" that doesn't mean they're the same question.

asmaier's "exact same question" actually provides a (however flimsy) motivation using standard GR for the idea that gravitons and phonons are related.

Your question just throws this vague idea at us without any justification, therefore making it seem like a random idea without any roots in mainstream physics.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .