Understanding the Compatibility of Relativity and Quantum Theories

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathshead
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the compatibility of the theory of relativity and quantum theories, specifically exploring the challenges and conflicts that arise when attempting to reconcile General Relativity with Quantum Chromodynamics and the Standard Model. The conversation includes theoretical explanations and conceptual clarifications regarding the nature of these theories and their interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe General Relativity as a theory of gravitation that involves the curvature of space-time due to mass and energy, while Quantum Chromodynamics is characterized as a theory of the strong nuclear force that challenges the notion of simultaneous knowledge of position and momentum.
  • One participant suggests that the incompatibility arises because Quantum Chromodynamics introduces uncertainties in position and momentum, which complicates the understanding of how space-time is curved according to General Relativity.
  • Another participant argues that the issues with combining these theories stem from the nonrenormalizability of gravitational interactions when using quantum perturbation theory, suggesting that it is not quantum field theory in general that fails, but rather the perturbative approach currently employed.
  • Clarifications are made regarding the definitions and scopes of Quantum Chromodynamics and the Standard Model, with one participant noting that QCD specifically pertains to the strong nuclear force and that the Standard Model encompasses both the strong and electroweak forces.
  • There is mention of the challenges in defining observables in field theory, particularly regarding the position and momentum of particles like photons, which are described as fields rather than discrete entities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of the incompatibility between relativity and quantum theories, with some agreeing on the challenges posed by uncertainties and nonrenormalizability, while others provide corrections and alternative perspectives on the definitions and implications of the theories involved. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the applicability of quantum perturbation theory and the definitions of observables in field theory. The conversation reflects a range of interpretations and understandings of complex theoretical concepts without reaching a consensus.

mathshead
can something tell me what the theory of relativity and quantum are, and how they are not compatiable with each other?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
General Relativity is a theory about gravitation. It says that the universe has an intrinsic curvature which is generated by the location and flow of mass and energy, and our perception of gravity is really just the natural tendency of matter and energy to flow along the curves of space-time.


Quantum Chromodynamics is a theory about electromagnetism and the weak & strong forces. It says that the concept of "simultaneous knowledge of position and momentum" is gibberish.



When you put the two together, things blow up.

Basically, if I understand it correctly, what happens is that QCD tells you that you don't know both the position and the momentum of a particle. This means that GR doesn't know exactly how space-time should be curved. This uncertainty magnifies the uncertainty in our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum... thus we're even less certain how it bends space time...

This self-perpetuating uncertainty keeps feeding and growing, until uncertainties become infinite!

Now, Quantum Mechanics works with such loops; less naive techniques are used to "renormalize" equations to get rid of the infinities... however the infinities involved with gravitation have resisted all attempts at being normalized away.


Hurkyl
 
Originally posted by Hurkyl
General Relativity is a theory about gravitation. It says that the universe has an intrinsic curvature which is generated by the location and flow of mass and energy, and our perception of gravity is really just the natural tendency of matter and energy to flow along the curves of space-time.
Yahoo ! 5.5 lines ! You're the man Hurkyl !
 
Originally posted by Hurkyl
General Relativity is a theory about gravitation. It says that the universe has an intrinsic curvature which is generated by the location and flow of mass and energy, and our perception of gravity is really just the natural tendency of matter and energy to flow along the curves of space-time.


Quantum Chromodynamics is a theory about electromagnetism and the weak & strong forces. It says that the concept of "simultaneous knowledge of position and momentum" is gibberish.



When you put the two together, things blow up.

this isn t quite accurate. first of all, QCD is a theory of the strong nuclear force only. the theory that encompasses the strong and electroweak forces is known as the standard model.

second, the standard model is a field theory, not a quantum single particle theory. as such, it says nothing about the observability of the position and momentum of a particle. the observables in a field theory are the field and is conjugate field momentum. so for example, the electric field amplitude of a photon and the magnetic field amplitude are not simultaneously observable. or the matter and antimatter components of a complex scalar field.

it doesn t even make a lot of sense to ask about the position of the photon, since it is a field, extended in space.

it might be possible to speak about position and momentum operators as observables in field theory, but i have never seen this done. then again, i m no expert in quantum field theory.






Basically, if I understand it correctly, what happens is that QCD tells you that you don't know both the position and the momentum of a particle. This means that GR doesn't know exactly how space-time should be curved. This uncertainty magnifies the uncertainty in our knowledge of the particle's position and momentum... thus we're even less certain how it bends space time...

This self-perpetuating uncertainty keeps feeding and growing, until uncertainties become infinite!

Now, Quantum Mechanics works with such loops; less naive techniques are used to "renormalize" equations to get rid of the infinities... however the infinities involved with gravitation have resisted all attempts at being normalized away.


Hurkyl

i haven t heard it described exactly that way, but i like the way it sounds.

let me offer the explanation as i have heard it.

firstly, it is not quantum field theory in general which blows up when you try to add gravity, it is quantum perturbation theory. it is currently unknown whether one can avoid the nonrenormalizability by avoiding perturbation theory (since perturbation is the only way we know how to use field theory).

ok, so perturbation theory involves expanding in a series that is polynomial in the coupling constant. higher order corrections contribute less to the interaction in say, QED, because of the small size of the coupling constant, the fine structure constant.

well, in gravitation, the field (the metric) couples to energy (remember: Gμν=8πGTμν energy couples to metric)

so in quantum theory, when you do your perturbation, you must have a series that is polynomial in energy, and blows up for the UV limit.
 
this isn t quite accurate. first of all, QCD is a theory of the strong nuclear force only. the theory that encompasses the strong and electroweak forces is known as the standard model.

Aha, thank you! I have been unsure for quite some time on this aspect of the nomenclature!


Hurkyl
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
12K
  • · Replies 84 ·
3
Replies
84
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
479
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K