QM and General Relativity may have finally been merged

[BackAgain]

She does? How so?

Not that I would be sad or surprised.

Too many irrelevant and unexplained videos get posted. I need a bit of a summary.

Jar look at it. It’s not that difficult.

 

[BackAgain]

"She will gut the paper" ... it's still September along this World Line ...

She already gutted it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Jar look at it. It’s not that difficult.

Even less difficult to sum up a point from it.

 

[BackAgain]

Even less difficult to sum up a point from it.

Stop being a quivering pussy. View it for a few moments. Really. It’s not difficult.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Stop being a quivering pussy. View it for a few moments. Really. It’s not difficult.

Hmm, I think the sissy is the one who can't sum up a point from it in his own big boy words.

Of course, we have different standards, in educated circles.

Why shouldn't they have dropped the second term in the Einstein field equation?

For example.

 

[BackAgain]

Hmm, I think the sissy is the one who can't sum up a point from it in his own big boy words.

No. Just click a link and listen. So simple even a moron like you can do it. You sissy.

Of course, we have different standards, in educated circles.

Right. I’m educated and you’re not and you’re a sissy.

Why shouldn't they have dropped the second term in the Einstein field equation?

For example.

You are ok with the multiple uses of a one symbol representing different mathematical concepts?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No. Just click a link and listen. So simple even a moron like you can do it.

But you can't.

Strange.

 

[ReinyDays]

She already gutted it.

She offered her opposition ... somebody has to ... others are busy confirming the math ... it's better than mGR ... it's about time lazy physicists finally started work on this ... talk about milking the clock ...

 

[ding]

So are you going to sum up why any of us should watch that video?

Why? I couldn't care less if you don't. If you want to believe garbage science that's totally your choice.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why? I couldn't care less if you don't. If you want to believe garbage science that's totally your choice.

I don't believe the paper's claims. It's one paper.

That kind of faith -- just believing one wild document that makes lofty claims -- is for religious peope like you.

 

[ding]

She offered her opposition ... somebody has to ... others are busy confirming the math ... it's better than mGR ... it's about time lazy physicists finally started work on this ... talk about milking the clock ...

First of all this paper is garbage science. Mass creates curvature so curvature must create mass? Really? That's not obviously flawed science? She said so many garbage science papers are getting published that the community has pretty much given up on fighting them.

 

[ding]

I don't believe the paper's claims. It's one paper.

That kind of faith -- just believing one wild document that makes lofty claims -- is for religious peope like you.

Ironically it was a person of faith (me) that set you straight on this scientific paper. Given that this has been a common occurrence, I would have thought you would have shown a little more humility.

That you think my faith precludes my understanding of complex subjects is your mistake to make. The reality is that my belief that God is Truth is what turns on all the learning centers of my mind. So what you perceive as a weakness is an incredible strength that will always defeat your ignorance and arrogance.

 

[BackAgain]

But you can't.

Strange.

I did.

But you are indeed strange.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ironically it was a person of faith (me) that set you straight on this scientific paper.

Set me straight? Uh, what? Ding, you post like a jilted 7th grader. Settle down. I didn't write or gobble up the other paper.

That you think my faith precludes my understanding of complex subjects

I don't think that about anyone. I have never stated or even implied it. Ding, you're flailing and swinging at flies that don't exist.

 

[ding]

Set me straight? Uh, what? Ding, you post like a jilted 7th grader. Settle down. I didn't write or gobble up the other paper.


I don't think that about anyone. I have never stated or even implied it. Ding, you're flailing and swinging at flies that don't exist.

Yep, set you straight and others as well.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yep, set you straight and others as well.

Uh, okay.

 

[scruffy]

You misunderstand. The planck length is itself a constant.

That's still debatable.

But okay, let's, assume it is.

Its expressed in meters, not "in other constants". Multiplying those constants you mentioned is how it is calculated. The article is stating that even those constants can be expressed using a combination of the two constants planck length and planck time.

IMO the Planck "length" is dependent on the Planck "time". It'more like a lower bound on measurement than a fixed constant.

 

[Nobody911]

Lazy OP is lazy....No hot link, no commentary.

Come on man.....At least pique our interest.

Evidence and Theories Supporting the Merging of Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

While a complete merger of Quantum Mechanics (QM) and General Relativity (GR) has not yet been achieved, several theoretical frameworks and experimental approaches are being explored that may provide insights into how these two fundamental theories could be reconciled.

1. Quantum Gravity Theories: Various theories aim to describe gravity within the framework of quantum mechanics. For instance, loop quantum gravity and string theory are prominent candidates that attempt to unify these theories. These approaches suggest that spacetime itself may have a quantum structure, which could lead to a better understanding of how gravity operates at quantum scales.

2. Semi-Classical Gravity: This model posits that matter behaves according to quantum mechanics while moving through a classical spacetime described by general relativity. This approach serves as a useful bridge between the two theories, allowing for some level of integration without fully merging them.

3. Experimental Investigations: Recent experiments, such as those conducted by the Chinese research project QUESS, explore the relationship between quantum and classical physics. These experiments aim to test how quantum particles behave in different gravitational fields, potentially providing empirical data that could inform theories of quantum gravity.

4. Mathematical Approaches: Some researchers are investigating relatively simple mathematical frameworks that could align the principles of QM with GR. These analyses do not attempt to create a full theory of quantum gravity but may highlight pathways toward reconciliation.

5. Emergence of Quantum Phenomena: There are proposals suggesting that quantum phenomena could emerge from a classical-like causal theory. This perspective could lead to new models that unify quantum mechanics and general relativity in a novel way.

Conclusion

While there is no definitive evidence that QM and GR have been merged, ongoing research and theoretical advancements continue to explore the potential for unification. The complexity of the challenge remains significant, but the pursuit of a coherent framework that encompasses both theories is an active area of investigation in modern physics.

==> No shocker if China ends up being the one to nail down the whole theory of everything! lol.

Sources :

Fairly Simple Math Could Bridge Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity

A framework that relies on college-level mathematics could describe what happens to particles in so-called spacetime rips, gravity fluctuations such as those that occur during the birth of a black hole

www.scientificamerican.com

Unifying quantum mechanics with Einstein’s general relativity

Prof Dr Norma Sanchez’s theory unifies quantum mechanics with Einstein’s general relativity, potentially transforming how we see the universe

researchoutreach.org

Bridge between quantum mechanics and general relativity still possible

Quantum mechanics and the general theory of relativity form the bedrock of the current understanding of physics—yet the two theories don't seem to work together. Physical phenomena rely on relationship of motion between the observed and the observer. Certain rules hold true across types of...

phys.org

[1704.04679] The present situation in quantum theory and its merging with general relativity

 

[para bellum]

It came from Thailand and China and can be verified or killed when the rest of the important scientists investigate it for the rest of us.

The abstract does not have enough detail to do an analysis. Wuwei has the proper approach- you have to see if it breaks any fundamental constants. The authors will have companion papers that have the detail, and there will be a back-and-forth between the authors and critics, and maybe we will learn more.

The youtube lady attacked the abstract on form, not on substance. I get that- her livelihood is youtube clicks. I looked into her. She was educated in physics, but unable to find a permanent position in basic research. That's typical- those are incredibly hard positions to land. Experiments like CERN and Fermilab and SLAC are very expensive to build, so there are not very many of them. The people lucky enough to land permanent positions basically hold them for life.

So she did what most people in her position do, they go into academia. She couldn't get tenure in academia, so now she does her youtube channel.

That's all fine, but youtube videos cannot answer the questions that I'm interested in getting the answers to.

I do not care if the authors do not use proper english syntax. The only syntax that matters is the equations. I do not care if the Epsilon symbol is used in different equations as long as the subscripts are consistent and defined in advance, which they are in this case. It may be confusing, but it does not break any math rules.

The use of planck units is not uncommon, be it the various string theories or SUSY or quantum mechanics. Planck length, mass, and time- practically by definition- will be incorporated into any quantum theory of gravity. They are the quantum units that will be used in the new definition of spacetime.

In Big Bang cosmology, the "planck epoch" is the first planck unit of time, where physics breaks down. That label is not a coincidence...

 

[scruffy]

In Big Bang cosmology, the "planck epoch" is the first planck unit of time, where physics breaks down. That label is not a coincidence...

Agreed. And things happen "within" that first Planck step, strongly suggesting that it's not the smallest unit.

Planck time makes assumptions about the speed of light, and since there was no light back then it's difficult to assign meaning to it.

The Planck constant came from black body radiation, and it was Max Born who gave it a relativistic meaning.

(Did you know Olivia Newton-John is Max Born's granddaughter?)