Q&A: Infinite Probabilities, Relativity & Quantum Mechanics

In summary: I'm thinking specifically of situations like the one you described where the physical quantity being calculated has an indeterminate outcome.
  • #1
muppet
608
1
In virtually every popsci book you read there's a discussion of a fundamental incompatibility between general relativity and quantum mechanics. Specifically, talk is often made of calculations that return infinite probabilities- which are obviously meaningless. I'm curious as to what it is specifically that we cannot calculate?
Also, are there any other areas of tension between the two formulations? The only other one I know of is that if one takes the collapse of the wavefunction to be "true" (i.e. to provide an ontological description of reality, rather than describing what we know about reality) then this cannot be made lorentz covariant (as it happens instantaneously, and simultaneity is a relative concept), so cannot be conceptually reconciled happily with special relativity (despite the fact that we have relativistic equations such as the Dirac and Klein-gordon equations). I'm a second year (UK) undergrad in maths and physics if that helps pitch an answer to the highest level I could understand.
Thanks in advance for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
the incompatibilities have been discussed at a technical level (as well as popsci) and someone here may have a good technical article to recommend to you.
Gen Rel is very different from Special. GR is background independent----the spacetime continuum has no fixed geometry. GR is developed without reference to any prior fixed geometry, and it has no absolute time.

Quantum theories are usually developed on a set geometry (like Minkowski or Euclidean geometry) fixed ahead of time. they often have some classical clock that gives meaning to the time variable.

In GR these things are not available and it seems very difficult to construct a quantum theory using the space and time of Gen Rel.

Also Gen Rel is diffeomorphism invariant ("general covariant") which means that no meaning is attached to a point of spacetime. there are no points of spacetime, only relationships between events. If you have one GR solution then you can moosh it around with a diffeomorphism and---in the view of GR---it is the SAME solution. It is often thought that the gravitational field in GR is represented by the spacetime metric (the distance function) but actually that isn't true, it is an equivalence class of metrics.
two metrics are equivalent if one can map into the other by a diffeomorphism
and a diffeomorphism is any smooth map with a smooth inverse

so GR has an idea of space and time that is radically different from the space and the time of any quantum theory
================================

another thing which people often do not mention when they discuss the incompatibility is that GR is a theory of GEOMETRY, dynamic spacetime geometry, and a quantum GR would have to have GEOMETRIC OBSERVABLES. For example lengths and volumes and areas and angles and stuff like that woud be observables.

And then the Heisenberg would apply and there would be INDETERMINACY of geometric quantities especially very small scale ones.
So inevitably the space geometry of any quantum GR would be CHAOTIC and foamy and fractally down at small scale.
So it wouldn't look like a usual smooth differentiable manifold at very small scale.

So GR offers Quantum a type of space and time it is not used to, for starters, like I discussed. But then if you get over that and DO get a quantum theory of GR then it would turn out to have a space that is not the smooth manifold continuum that GR is used to. So they BOTH have something difficult to assimilate.

muppet said:
... I'm curious as to what it is specifically that we cannot calculate?
...

The problem is deeper than that. There is not a well-defined mathematical context where you can say such and such well-defined thing should be calculated. So then if you could calculate it you would have solved the problem. it isn't like that.

Probably we need
1. a new model of spacetime different from the smooth manifold that Riemann gave us in 1850 ( and so far is the most general idea of the continuum that we have---with quantum field theory not even assimilated to that yet but only working on a selected rigid frame)

2. a new understanding of quantum mechanics and why it works

3. a new understanding of space time and matter---and why matter bends space---and how matter and space are just different aspects of the same thing-----that is: space and matter as EMERGENT properties of the same fundamental microscopic degrees of freedom
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Thanks for your reply Marcus. So can I ask where the idea of infinite probabilities enters into it?
 

1. What is the concept of infinite probabilities in relation to quantum mechanics?

The concept of infinite probabilities in quantum mechanics refers to the idea that certain events or outcomes can have an infinite number of possible outcomes. This is due to the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics, where particles can exist in multiple states at once and only have a certain likelihood of being in a specific state.

2. How does relativity affect our understanding of quantum mechanics?

Relativity plays a crucial role in our understanding of quantum mechanics, particularly in the concept of space-time. Relativity helps to reconcile the seemingly contradictory principles of quantum mechanics, such as wave-particle duality, by providing a framework for understanding how particles behave in different reference frames.

3. What are some real-world applications of quantum mechanics?

Quantum mechanics has numerous applications in modern technology, including the development of computers, lasers, and medical imaging devices. It is also used in cryptography and secure communication systems, as well as in the study of materials and their properties.

4. Can quantum mechanics be used to explain all physical phenomena?

While quantum mechanics is incredibly successful in explaining the behavior of particles on a microscopic level, it is not applicable to all physical phenomena. For example, classical mechanics is still used to explain large-scale objects and their movements, while general relativity is used to explain the behavior of massive objects in space.

5. How do scientists test and validate theories in quantum mechanics?

Scientists use a variety of experimental methods to test and validate theories in quantum mechanics. This includes conducting experiments with quantum systems, such as atoms and subatomic particles, and analyzing the results to see if they align with the predictions of the theory. Scientists also use advanced mathematical models and simulations to test the validity of theories and make predictions about new phenomena.

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
28
Views
261
Replies
12
Views
686
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
438
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top