Experimental Quantum Gravity: A History of Phenomenology

For most of the twentieth century, quantum gravity was considered purely theoretical — a problem for the distant future, requiring particle accelerators at the Planck energy (1019 GeV) or observations of black hole interiors. That view has changed. Beginning in the late 1990s, a growing community recognized that precision experiments at laboratory energies can constrain, and potentially detect, signatures of quantum spacetime. This page traces the history of that shift from pure theory to testable phenomenology.

1. Foundations: The Incompatibility Problem (1916–1960s)

Einstein’s general relativity (1916) describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime. Quantum mechanics describes matter and energy as discrete, probabilistic, and subject to the uncertainty principle. The two theories are spectacularly successful in their respective domains but fundamentally incompatible: GR treats spacetime as a smooth classical manifold, while QM requires fields to fluctuate at all scales.

Early attempts to quantize gravity — by Rosenfeld (1930), Bronstein (1936), and others — immediately encountered divergences. Feynman (1963) developed the perturbative approach to quantum gravity, which was subsequently shown to be non-renormalizable — the standard machinery of quantum field theory produces infinite answers that cannot be absorbed by a finite number of counterterms. DeWitt (1967) developed the canonical approach, leading to the Wheeler–DeWitt equation, but the problem of time and the absence of experimental guidance left the field in a state of formal elegance without empirical contact.

The key insight from this period: the Planck scale (length ~10−35 m, energy ~1019 GeV, time ~10−44 s) sets the natural scale where quantum and gravitational effects are both important. This seemed to place quantum gravity forever beyond experimental reach.

References: Foundations (19 papers)
  • 1916   Die Grundlage der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie, Annalen der Physik.
    A. Einstein
    DOI: 10.1002/andp.19163540702
  • 1930   Zur Quantelung der Wellenfelder, Annalen der Physik.
    L. Rosenfeld
    DOI: 10.1002/andp.19303970107
  • 1936   Quantentheorie schwacher Gravitationsfelder, Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion.
    M. P. Bronstein
  • 1962   The Dynamics of General Relativity, General Relativity and Gravitation.
    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, C. W. Misner
    DOI: 10.1007/s10714-008-0661-1
  • 1963   Quantum Theory of Gravitation, Acta Physica Polonica.
    R. P. Feynman
  • 1967   Quantum Theory of Gravity. I. The Canonical Theory, Physical Review.
    B. S. DeWitt
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.160.1113
  • 1968   Superspace and the Nature of Quantum Geometrodynamics, Battelle Rencontres.
    J. A. Wheeler
  • 1973   Black Holes and Entropy, Physical Review D.
    J. D. Bekenstein
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.7.2333
  • 1975   Particle Creation by Black Holes, Communications in Mathematical Physics.
    S. W. Hawking
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02345020
  • 1976   Notes on Black-Hole Evaporation, Physical Review D.
    W. G. Unruh
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.14.870
  • 1993   Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity, arXiv:gr-qc/9310026.
    G. 't Hooft
  • 1995   Thermodynamics of Spacetime: The Einstein Equation of State, Physical Review Letters.
    T. Jacobson
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.1260
  • 1995   The World as a Hologram, Journal of Mathematical Physics.
    L. Susskind
    DOI: 10.1063/1.531249
  • 1996   On Gravity's Role in Quantum State Reduction, General Relativity and Gravitation.
    R. Penrose
    DOI: 10.1007/BF02105068
  • 1999   The Large N Limit of Superconformal Field Theories and Supergravity, International Journal of Theoretical Physics.
    J. M. Maldacena
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1026654312961
  • 2004   Quantum Gravity, Cambridge University Press.
    C. Rovelli
    DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511755804
  • 2012   Quantum Gravity, Oxford University Press.
    C. Kiefer
    DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199585205.001.0001
  • 2013   Minimal Length Scale Scenarios for Quantum Gravity, Living Reviews in Relativity.
    S. Hossenfelder
    DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2013-2
  • 2013   Quantum-Spacetime Phenomenology, Living Reviews in Relativity.
    G. Amelino-Camelia
    DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2013-5

2. Black Holes and the Holographic Principle (1970s–1990s)

The theoretical landscape transformed with three discoveries that revealed quantum gravity might have observable consequences even at low energies:

  • Bekenstein entropy (1973): Black holes carry entropy proportional to their horizon area, not their volume — suggesting that the fundamental degrees of freedom of quantum gravity live on boundaries, not in bulk spacetime.

  • Hawking radiation (1975): Black holes emit thermal radiation due to quantum effects near the horizon. This is a genuine quantum-gravitational prediction, though the temperature is far too low to detect for astrophysical black holes.

  • The holographic principle (‘t Hooft 1993, Susskind 1995): The maximum information content of a region of space scales with its boundary area in Planck units, not its volume. This radical idea — that spacetime is fundamentally lower-dimensional than it appears — found its sharpest realization in Maldacena’s AdS/CFT correspondence (1998).

Simultaneously, Jacobson (1995) showed that Einstein’s equations can be derived from thermodynamic arguments applied to local causal horizons, and Penrose (1996) proposed that gravity plays an active role in quantum state reduction — that superpositions of different spacetime geometries are fundamentally unstable. These developments suggested that the interface between gravity and quantum mechanics might be probed without reaching the Planck energy.

3. Phenomenological Frameworks

3a. Holographic Noise and Spacetime Foam

If spacetime has a granular structure at the Planck scale, this granularity might produce measurable noise in precision instruments. Amelino-Camelia (1999) proposed that gravity-wave interferometers could serve as quantum-gravity detectors. Ng and van Dam (2000) developed spacetime-foam models predicting distance uncertainties scaling as (length)1/3 in Planck units.

Hogan (2008, 2012) made the idea concrete with specific predictions for holographic noise: correlated position fluctuations in interferometers arising from the holographic encoding of spatial information. This led directly to the Fermilab Holometer — a purpose-built instrument to search for Planck-scale correlations.

More recently, Verlinde and Zurek (2019–2021) developed models of “geontropic” spacetime fluctuations based on quantum information considerations in holographic theories. Their predictions differ quantitatively from Hogan’s and are being tested by the GQuEST experiment (Vermeulen et al. 2025), a photon-counting interferometer at Fermilab in which our group participates.

References: Holographic Noise (12 papers)

3b. Gravitational Decoherence

If gravity is fundamentally classical, or if quantum superpositions of different spacetime geometries are unstable, then massive objects in superposition should decohere faster than standard quantum mechanics predicts. This idea has independent roots in:

  • Diósi (1984, 1987, 1989): Proposed gravitational self-energy as a source of spontaneous localization, leading to a master equation for gravitational decoherence.
  • Penrose (1996, 2014): Argued that superpositions of distinct spacetime geometries are unstable, with a lifetime set by the gravitational self-energy difference.
  • Kafri, Taylor, and Milburn (2014): Showed that if gravity is mediated by a classical channel (no gravitons), it necessarily causes decoherence.

The Diósi–Penrose model makes specific predictions for the decoherence rate of massive superpositions, which are being tested by optomechanical and matter-wave experiments. Reviews by Bassi, Grossardt, and Ulbricht (2017) and Carney, Stamp, and Taylor (2019) map the experimental landscape.

References: Gravitational Decoherence (12 papers)

3c. Spacetime Dissipation

Some approaches to quantum gravity predict that spacetime itself dissipates energy — that the vacuum is not a perfectly lossless medium but acts like a viscous fluid at short distances. This arises naturally in emergent-gravity frameworks where spacetime is a coarse-grained description of underlying microscopic degrees of freedom.

Jacobson (1995) showed that Einstein’s equations follow from thermodynamic reasoning, and Verlinde (2011) developed an entropic approach to gravity. Padmanabhan (2010, 2015) explored the thermodynamic perspective systematically. Yang, Miao, Lee, Helou, and Chen (2013) developed a framework for testing these ideas with interferometers, showing how precision displacement measurements can constrain models in which spacetime dissipates energy.

References: Spacetime Dissipation (7 papers)
  • 2013   Macroscopic Quantum Mechanics in a Classical Spacetime, Physical Review Letters.
    H. Yang, H. Miao, D.-S. Lee, B. Helou, Y. Chen
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.170401
  • 2015   Macroscopic Quantum Mechanics in a Classical Spacetime: Towards the Laboratory Search for Space-Time Dissipation, arXiv:1504.02545.
    H. Yang, L. R. Price, N. D. Smith, R. X. Adhikari, H. Miao, Y. Chen
  • 2011   On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton, Journal of High Energy Physics.
    E. Verlinde
    DOI: 10.1007/JHEP04(2011)029
  • 2010   Thermodynamical Aspects of Gravity: New Insights, Reports on Progress in Physics.
    T. Padmanabhan
    DOI: 10.1088/0034-4885/73/4/046901
  • 2015   Emergent Gravity Paradigm: Recent Progress, Modern Physics Letters A.
    T. Padmanabhan
    DOI: 10.1142/S0217732315400076
  • 2008   Stochastic Gravity: Theory and Applications, Living Reviews in Relativity.
    B. L. Hu, E. Verdaguer
    DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2008-3
  • 2008   Nonequilibrium Quantum Field Theory, Cambridge University Press.
    E. Calzetta, B. L. Hu
    DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511535123

3d. Modified Dispersion Relations and Lorentz Invariance Violation

Many quantum gravity approaches predict that Lorentz symmetry is modified or broken at the Planck scale. If photons of different energies travel at slightly different speeds, this would produce energy-dependent time delays observable in light from distant astrophysical sources.

Colladay and Kostelecký (1998) developed the Standard Model Extension (SME), a systematic framework for parameterizing Lorentz violation. Amelino-Camelia (2001, 2002) proposed doubly special relativity (DSR), preserving the relativity principle while introducing an invariant energy scale. Magueijo and Smolin (2002, 2003) developed an alternative formulation. Gambini and Pullin (1999) showed that loop quantum gravity predicts modified dispersion relations for photons.

Comprehensive reviews by Mattingly (2005) and Liberati (2013) catalog the theoretical landscape and experimental bounds.

References: Modified Dispersion Relations (10 papers)

3e. Generalized Uncertainty Principle (GUP)

String theory, loop quantum gravity, and various thought experiments involving black holes all suggest a minimum measurable length at the Planck scale. The standard Heisenberg uncertainty principle ΔxΔp ≥ ℏ/2 is modified to include a gravitational correction: Δx ≥ ℏ/(2Δp) + α lP2 Δp/ℏ, where α is a dimensionless parameter and lP is the Planck length.

Maggiore (1993) derived the GUP from general arguments about quantum gravity. Kempf, Mangano, and Mann (1995) developed the Hilbert-space formalism. The phenomenological consequences — modified atomic spectra, modified oscillator frequencies, corrections to radiation pressure in interferometers — are being explored experimentally. Pikovski et al. (2012) proposed using quantum optics to probe the GUP, and Bosso, Das, and Mann (2018) showed that Advanced LIGO is potentially sensitive to GUP effects.

References: Generalized Uncertainty Principle (9 papers)
  • 1993   A Generalized Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Gravity, Physics Letters B.
    M. Maggiore
    DOI: 10.1016/0370-2693(93)91401-8
  • 1995   Hilbert Space Representation of the Minimal Length Uncertainty Relation, Physical Review D.
    A. Kempf, G. Mangano, R. B. Mann
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.52.1108
  • 1999   Generalized Uncertainty Principle in Quantum Gravity from Micro-Black Hole Gedanken Experiment, Physics Letters B.
    F. Scardigli
    DOI: 10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00167-7
  • 1999   Minimal Length Uncertainty Relation and the Hydrogen Atom, Journal of Physics A.
    F. Brau
    DOI: 10.1088/0305-4470/32/44/308
  • 2009   Discreteness of Space from the Generalized Uncertainty Principle, Physics Letters B.
    A. F. Ali, S. Das, E. C. Vagenas
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2009.06.061
  • 2011   A Proposal for Testing Quantum Gravity in the Lab, Physical Review D.
    A. F. Ali, S. Das, E. C. Vagenas
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.84.044013
  • 2012   Probing Planck-Scale Physics with Quantum Optics, Nature Physics.
    I. Pikovski, M. R. Vanner, M. Aspelmeyer, M. S. Kim, Č. Brukner
    DOI: 10.1038/nphys2262
  • 2018   Potential Tests of the Generalized Uncertainty Principle in the Advanced LIGO Experiment, Physics Letters B.
    P. Bosso, S. Das, R. B. Mann
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2018.08.061
  • 2023   30 Years In: Quo Vadis Generalized Uncertainty Principle?, Classical and Quantum Gravity.
    P. Bosso, G. G. Luciano, L. Petruzziello, F. Wagner
    DOI: 10.1088/1361-6382/acf021

3f. Gravity-Mediated Entanglement

Perhaps the most direct test of quantum gravity: if two massive particles become entangled solely through their gravitational interaction, this would demonstrate that gravity can transmit quantum information — strong evidence that gravity is quantized. This was proposed independently by Bose et al. (2017) and Marletto and Vedral (2017), and is commonly known as the BMV proposal.

The key challenge is preparing sufficiently massive particles in coherent superposition while isolating them from all non-gravitational interactions. Belenchia et al. (2018) analyzed the theoretical requirements. Danielson, Satishchandran, and Wald (2022) examined subtleties involving the distinction between Newtonian gravity and graviton exchange.

References: Gravity-Mediated Entanglement (5 papers)
  • 2017   Spin Entanglement Witness for Quantum Gravity, Physical Review Letters.
    S. Bose et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.240401
  • 2017   Gravitationally Induced Entanglement between Two Massive Particles Is Sufficient Evidence of Quantum Effects in Gravity, Physical Review Letters.
    C. Marletto, V. Vedral
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.240402
  • 2018   Quantum Superposition of Massive Objects and the Quantization of Gravity, Physical Review D.
    A. Belenchia, R. M. Wald, F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, Č. Brukner, M. Aspelmeyer
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98.126009
  • 2020   Observable Quantum Entanglement Due to Gravity, npj Quantum Information.
    T. Krisnanda, G. Y. Tham, M. Paternostro, T. Paterek
    DOI: 10.1038/s41534-020-0243-y
  • 2021   Mechanical Quantum Sensing in the Search for Dark Matter, Quantum Science and Technology.
    D. Carney et al.
    DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/abcfcd

4. Experimental Constraints

4a. Gravitational-Wave Interferometers

The most sensitive displacement measurements in physics come from laser interferometers designed to detect gravitational waves. These instruments are also sensitive to exotic noise sources predicted by quantum gravity models.

The Fermilab Holometer (Chou et al. 2016, 2017) is a dedicated Planck-scale correlation experiment: two co-located 40-meter Michelson interferometers whose outputs are cross-correlated at MHz frequencies. It set direct constraints on holographic shear noise (Chou et al. 2017) and rotational correlations (Chou et al. 2021).

The QUEST experiment at Cardiff (Vermeulen et al. 2021) uses tabletop 3D interferometers, while the GQuEST experiment at Fermilab (Vermeulen et al. 2025) uses photon-counting readout sensitive to geontropic fluctuations predicted by Verlinde and Zurek. The Sharmila, Vermeulen, and Datta (2025) framework provides a unified way to classify spacetime-fluctuation signatures across different interferometer types.

References: GW Interferometer Constraints (6 papers)
  • 2016   First Measurements of High Frequency Cross-Spectra from a Pair of Large Michelson Interferometers, Physical Review Letters.
    A. S. Chou et al. (Holometer Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.111102
  • 2017   The Holometer: An Instrument to Probe Planckian Quantum Geometry, Classical and Quantum Gravity.
    A. S. Chou et al. (Holometer Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1088/1361-6382/aa5e5c
  • 2017   Interferometric Constraints on Quantum Geometrical Shear Noise Correlations, Classical and Quantum Gravity.
    A. S. Chou et al. (Holometer Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1088/1361-6382/aa7bd3
  • 2021   An Experiment for Observing Quantum Gravity Phenomena Using Twin Table-Top 3D Interferometers, Classical and Quantum Gravity.
    S. M. Vermeulen et al.
    DOI: 10.1088/1361-6382/abe757
  • 2025   Photon-Counting Interferometry to Detect Geontropic Space-Time Fluctuations with GQuEST, Physical Review X.
    S. M. Vermeulen et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.15.011034
  • 2021   Interferometric Constraints on Spacelike Coherent Rotational Fluctuations, Physical Review Letters.
    A. S. Chou et al. (Holometer Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.241301

4b. Atom Interferometers

Atom interferometers measure gravitational effects on quantum-mechanical particles with extraordinary precision. The COW experiment (Colella, Overhauser, Werner 1975) demonstrated gravitationally induced quantum interference using neutrons.

Modern atom interferometers have achieved precision tests of the equivalence principle (Asenbaum et al. 2020, 10−12 level), measured spacetime curvature across a single wave function (Asenbaum et al. 2017), and observed the gravitational Aharonov-Bohm effect (Overstreet et al. 2022). Future long-baseline instruments — MAGIS-100 at Fermilab (Abe et al. 2021) and AION in the UK (Badurina et al. 2020) — will extend sensitivity to gravitational waves in the mid-frequency band and search for ultralight dark matter.

References: Atom Interferometers (8 papers)
  • 1975   Observation of Gravitationally Induced Quantum Interference, Physical Review Letters.
    R. Colella, A. W. Overhauser, S. A. Werner
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.34.1472
  • 1999   Measurement of Gravitational Acceleration by Dropping Atoms, Nature.
    A. Peters, K. Y. Chung, S. Chu
    DOI: 10.1038/23655
  • 2010   A Precision Measurement of the Gravitational Redshift by the Interference of Matter Waves, Nature.
    H. Müller, A. Peters, S. Chu
    DOI: 10.1038/nature08776
  • 2017   Phase Shift in an Atom Interferometer due to Spacetime Curvature across Its Wave Function, Physical Review Letters.
    P. Asenbaum et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.183602
  • 2020   Atom-Interferometric Test of the Equivalence Principle at the 10⁻¹² Level, Physical Review Letters.
    P. Asenbaum et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.191101
  • 2022   Observation of a Gravitational Aharonov-Bohm Effect, Science.
    C. Overstreet, P. Asenbaum, J. Curti, M. Kim, M. A. Kasevich
    DOI: 10.1126/science.abl7152
  • 2020   AION: An Atom Interferometer Observatory and Network, Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics.
    L. Badurina et al.
    DOI: 10.1088/1475-7516/2020/05/011
  • 2021   Matter-Wave Atomic Gradiometer Interferometric Sensor (MAGIS-100), Quantum Science and Technology.
    M. Abe et al. (MAGIS Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/abf719

4c. Gamma-Ray Burst Dispersion

If Lorentz invariance is violated at the Planck scale, high-energy photons from distant astrophysical sources should arrive with measurable time delays relative to low-energy photons. Gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) — the most energetic explosions in the universe, at cosmological distances — are ideal probes.

Amelino-Camelia et al. (1998) proposed the method. The Fermi LAT observation of GRB 090510 (Abdo et al. 2009) set the strongest constraint: the quantum-gravity energy scale for linear dispersion exceeds the Planck energy by a factor of several, ruling out the simplest Lorentz-violating models. Vasileiou et al. (2013) and Ellis et al. (2019) refined these bounds using larger GRB samples.

These results demonstrate that astrophysical observations can probe Planck-scale physics — a conceptual breakthrough, even though the specific models tested predict null results.

References: Gamma-Ray Burst Constraints (6 papers)
  • 1998   Tests of Quantum Gravity from Observations of Gamma-Ray Bursts, Nature.
    G. Amelino-Camelia, J. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, D. V. Nanopoulos, S. Sarkar
    DOI: 10.1038/26793
  • 2006   Robust Limits on Lorentz Violation from Gamma-Ray Bursts, Astroparticle Physics.
    J. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, D. V. Nanopoulos, A. S. Sakharov, E. K. G. Sarkisyan
    DOI: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2006.04.001
  • 2008   Probing Quantum Gravity Using Photons from a Flare of the Active Galactic Nucleus Markarian 501 Observed by the MAGIC Telescope, Physics Letters B.
    J. Albert et al. (MAGIC Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2008.08.053
  • 2009   A Limit on the Variation of the Speed of Light Arising from Quantum Gravity Effects, Nature.
    A. A. Abdo et al. (Fermi LAT and Fermi GBM Collaborations)
    DOI: 10.1038/nature08574
  • 2013   Constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violation from Fermi-Large Area Telescope Observations of Gamma-Ray Bursts, Physical Review D.
    V. Vasileiou et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.87.122001
  • 2019   Robust Constraint on Lorentz Violation Using Fermi-LAT Gamma-Ray Burst Data, Physical Review D.
    J. Ellis et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.99.083009

4d. Neutron Interferometry

Neutrons — massive, electrically neutral, and readily available from nuclear reactors — are natural probes of gravity at the quantum level. The COW experiment (Colella, Overhauser, Werner 1975) demonstrated gravitationally induced quantum interference using a neutron interferometer.

Nesvizhevsky et al. (2002) observed quantum states of neutrons bouncing in Earth’s gravitational field — the gravitational analogue of electronic energy levels. Jenke et al. (2011, 2014) developed gravity resonance spectroscopy, using these bound states to constrain short-range modifications of gravity and dark energy models.

References: Neutron Interferometry (4 papers)
  • 2002   Quantum States of Neutrons in the Earth's Gravitational Field, Nature.
    V. V. Nesvizhevsky et al.
    DOI: 10.1038/415297a
  • 2011   Realization of a Gravity-Resonance-Spectroscopy Technique, Nature Physics.
    T. Jenke, P. Geltenbort, H. Lemmel, H. Abele
    DOI: 10.1038/nphys1970
  • 2014   Gravity Resonance Spectroscopy Constrains Dark Energy and Dark Matter Scenarios, Physical Review Letters.
    T. Jenke et al.
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151105
  • 2012   Gravitation and Quantum Interference Experiments with Neutrons, New Journal of Physics.
    H. Abele, H. Leeb
    DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/14/5/055010

4e. Optomechanical Experiments

Cavity optomechanics — the interaction between light and mechanical oscillators — provides a platform for preparing macroscopic objects near their quantum ground state and measuring their dynamics with quantum-limited precision.

Milestones include cooling micro- and nanomechanical oscillators to their quantum ground states (Teufel et al. 2011, Chan et al. 2011), observing quantum back-action at room temperature (Cripe et al. 2019), generating optomechanical squeezing (Aggarwal et al. 2020), approaching the ground state of 10-kg LIGO mirrors (Whittle et al. 2021), and observing quantum correlations between light and kilogram-scale mirrors (Yu et al. 2020). Frequency-dependent squeezing (McCuller et al. 2020) has been implemented in Advanced LIGO, demonstrating quantum noise engineering at the interferometer scale.

These capabilities are the building blocks for testing gravitational decoherence, the GUP, and gravity-mediated entanglement. The Matsumoto group (2019, 2020) has developed milligram-scale pendulums for short-range gravity measurements at the quantum limit.

References: Optomechanical Experiments (10 papers)

4f. CMB and Cosmological Constraints

If quantum gravity modifies physics at the Planck scale, these modifications could be imprinted on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) through the trans-Planckian problem: during inflation, modes that are now cosmological in scale were once smaller than the Planck length. If Planck-scale physics modifies the initial conditions for these modes, the primordial power spectrum would carry a quantum-gravity signature.

Martin and Brandenberger (2001) identified the problem. Easther et al. (2001, 2002) explored specific models. Brandenberger and Martin (2013) reviewed the theoretical landscape. While current CMB data are consistent with standard inflation, future measurements could constrain trans-Planckian modifications.

References: CMB Constraints (5 papers)

5. Tests of General Relativity

Experimental tests of GR provide the empirical foundation on which quantum gravity phenomenology is built. Every proposed modification of gravity — whether from string theory, loop quantum gravity, or emergent-gravity frameworks — must be consistent with the increasingly stringent constraints from classical GR tests. These experiments also provide the technical heritage (precision timing, interferometry, atom interferometry, torsion balances) that quantum gravity experiments now repurpose.

5a. Comprehensive Reviews

Will (2014) provides the definitive review of the confrontation between GR and experiment, covering the parameterized post-Newtonian framework, solar system tests, binary pulsars, and gravitational waves. Berti et al. (2015) survey present and future astrophysical tests, with emphasis on strong-field gravity and prospects from gravitational-wave observations.

References: Comprehensive Reviews (2 papers)
  • 2014   The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment, Living Reviews in Relativity.
    C. M. Will
    DOI: 10.12942/lrr-2014-4
  • 2015   Testing General Relativity with Present and Future Astrophysical Observations, Classical and Quantum Gravity.
    E. Berti, E. Barausse, V. Cardoso et al.
    DOI: 10.1088/0264-9381/32/24/243001

5b. Gravitational-Wave Tests

The detection of binary black hole and neutron star mergers opened a new regime for testing GR in the strong-field, highly dynamical sector. The LIGO-Virgo-KAGRA collaborations have systematically tested GR with each gravitational-wave transient catalog, constraining parametrized deviations from GR waveforms, testing the no-hair theorem through ringdown spectroscopy, and bounding the mass of the graviton. Yunes, Yagi, and Pretorius (2016) analyze the theoretical implications of the earliest detections.

References: Gravitational-Wave Tests (4 papers)
  • 2016   Tests of General Relativity with GW150914, Physical Review Letters.
    LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.221101
  • 2019   Tests of General Relativity with the First Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog, Physical Review D.
    LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaborations
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.104036
  • 2021   Tests of General Relativity with GWTC-3, arXiv:2112.06861.
    LIGO Scientific, Virgo, and KAGRA Collaborations
    DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2112.06861
  • 2016   Theoretical Physics Implications of the Binary Black-Hole Mergers GW150914 and GW151226, Physical Review D.
    N. Yunes, K. Yagi, F. Pretorius
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.94.084002

5c. Strong-Field Tests: Pulsars and Black Holes

Binary pulsars have provided precision tests of GR for decades. Stairs (2003) and Kramer and Wex (2009) review pulsar timing tests. Kramer et al. (2021) report the most precise strong-field gravity tests to date from the double pulsar PSR J0737−3039A/B, confirming GR at the 0.013% level. Psaltis (2008) reviews probes of strong-field gravity more broadly. Berti, Cardoso, and Starinets (2009) review quasinormal modes — the characteristic ringdown frequencies of perturbed black holes — which encode the geometry of the horizon and provide tests of the no-hair theorem. The Event Horizon Telescope (2020) used the shadow of M87* to test GR beyond the post-Newtonian regime.

References: Strong-Field Tests (6 papers)

5d. Equivalence Principle Tests

The Einstein equivalence principle — that all bodies fall at the same rate regardless of composition — is a cornerstone of GR. MICROSCOPE (Touboul et al. 2022) tested the weak equivalence principle in orbit to a precision of 10−15, the most stringent bound to date. Tino et al. (2020) review precision gravity tests and the equivalence principle using atom interferometry and other techniques.

References: Equivalence Principle Tests (2 papers)
  • 2022   MICROSCOPE Mission: Final Results of the Test of the Equivalence Principle, Physical Review Letters.
    P. Touboul et al. (MICROSCOPE Collaboration)
    DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.121102
  • 2020   Precision Gravity Tests and the Einstein Equivalence Principle, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics.
    G. M. Tino et al.
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2020.103772

5e. Short-Range Gravity and the Inverse-Square Law

Extra dimensions, dark energy, and various beyond-Standard-Model scenarios predict deviations from Newtonian gravity at sub-millimeter distances. The Eöt-Wash group at the University of Washington has set the leading constraints using torsion balance experiments. Adelberger, Heckel, and Nelson (2003) review tests of the gravitational inverse-square law. Adelberger et al. (2009) review torsion balance experiments as a low-energy frontier of particle physics.

References: Short-Range Gravity (2 papers)
  • 2003   Tests of the Gravitational Inverse-Square Law, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science.
    E. G. Adelberger, B. R. Heckel, A. E. Nelson
    DOI: 10.1146/annurev.nucl.53.041002.110503
  • 2009   Torsion Balance Experiments: A Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics.
    E. G. Adelberger, J. H. Gundlach, B. R. Heckel, S. Kay, C. W. Stubbs
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ppnp.2008.08.002

5f. Landmark Experiments

Pound and Rebka (1959) measured the gravitational redshift of gamma rays over a 22.6-meter tower at Harvard, confirming GR’s prediction that clocks run slower in stronger gravitational fields. This experiment established that gravity couples to energy, not just mass, and remains one of the most elegant precision tests of GR.

References: Landmark Experiments (1 papers)

← Back to Quantum Gravity & Foundational Physics