[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 29 KB, 400x400, concord-quantum-gravity-watch.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
938494 No.938494 [Reply] [Original]

I have a cursory understanding of both quantum mechanics and general relativity. Can someone shortly explain the famous contradiction between the two?

I really don't see where they are incompatible, but that because I have only a very broad understanding of each.

Pic kinda related, it's a kick-ass watch called "quantum gravity".

>> No.938507

>>938494

1) Unable to fully quantize gravity
2) Cant renormalize and QM GR, hence everything blows up (everything starts to diverge)

>> No.938515

On very small scales, highly energetic particles should be greatly attracted to each other because (E=MC^2) their energy folds spacetime just as much as mass does.
Except they aren't. This only makes sense if NOTHING has mass, and everything is energy. But if that's the case there shouldn't be gravity at all, and galaxies shouldn't work.

So we know that both our current understanding of gravity and our current understanding of quantum mechanics are wrong. The fix is the Unified Field Theory which will explain all the forces in terms of each other, but we haven't figured it out yet.

>> No.938516

>>938507
Okay. So the contradiction lies in GR's characterization of gravity as being identical to acceleration due to the bending of space?

>> No.938526

>>938515
Ah. That makes sense.

Can anyone confirm this guy is right?

>> No.938531

>>938494
>Can someone shortly explain the famous contradiction between the two?

There is none. Every science has a range of validity, and only works for that range, even QM. GR works fine for its range of validty, and QM works fine it its range of validity. The thing is they both have different ranges.

>> No.938534

>>938526
No, that is bullshit.

>> No.938536

>>938531
Thanks. We're glad you cleared up that issue. Now Science can go home and nap.

>> No.938539

>>938534
K then. Care to take a stab?

>> No.938546

>>938536
sounds good! Nap time!

>> No.938556

Can someone give a mathematical example of an incompatibility?

>> No.938569

>>938539
QFT is euclidean, GM is non eucliean. If you try to make QTF non eucliean it fucks up, everything diverges and shit. Also, if you try and quantize GR then you have to quantize non eucliean space, and everything fucks up as well (more un-normalizable shit, everything blows up).

Its really all about the matheframe work, they just dont seem compatable.

>> No.938580
File: 547 KB, 1185x1618, mr-t (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
938580

>>938556
wtf?

I pity the fool who cant express scientific questions in a quantitative manner.

You want me to measure the happiess you get from cute puppies as well.

GTFO!

>> No.938588

>>938569
That... sounds about right then. So, it the GEOMETRY of GR and the QUANTA of QM that are the basis of the incompatibility.

>> No.938589

>>938556
Its alll about the normilzation. Do you know Cal 2?

>> No.938592

>>938589
Fuck yeah I know cal 2. Math major.

>> No.938597

>>938580
Sorry Mr. T, I shouldn't have asked for any mathematical formulations relating to quantum mechanics and general relativity. Everyone knows these have nothing to do with math.

>> No.938599

>>938588
Its part of it, I image there are tons of other problems are well, thats just the basics.

>> No.938608

>>938592
Ok, so yeah. One of the key problems is you get inegrals that give infinity. We had this problem for QTF too, but they came up with a way around that shit (renormalization). In GR, no one has figured out away around it. Hence you try to quantize that shit and you get inegrals that just give infinity for everything (useless physics).

>> No.938611
File: 25 KB, 300x330, pity-the-fool1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
938611

>>938597
It's ok fool

see
>>938608

>> No.938617

>>938608
didn't we have the same problem with electroweak, until someone fixed that?

>> No.938660

>>938617
yeah, thats what I said. The renomalization. But the electroweak actually still isnt complete. We need the higgs to confirm that. The higgs will help with Quantum grav as well, but still its anywhere from complete.