Relativity vs Quantum Mechanics: Understanding the Difference

Bluecom
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
From my understanding and from what I have read Quantum Mechanics and Relativity do not mix well. I understand that Quantum mechanics gives you probabilities and relativity gives you a more define answer. Is that the only reason why they don't mix? Are there other reasons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's quantum mechanics doesn't mix well with general relativity. Special relativistic quantum mechanics is a perfectly well defined field.

They don't mix well because nobody has as yet been able to coherently combine them. The two theories describe different things. One describes gravity (general relativity), and the other describes the other 3 forces of nature. Roughly speaking, nobody has been able to straightforwardly combine the two in a way that does not give you a bunch of infinities everywhere.

There are some attempts like string theory, and loop quantum gravity, but they are basically wholly new theories, and they all contain parts that have not yet been worked out.
 
Gotcha! Thanks for taking the time to answer my question!(:
 
QM and GR work just fine together at low energies. It is entirely incorrect to say that QM and GR cannot be made compatible. They certainly can below certain cutoffs. The issue, if you want to call it that, is what happens at high enough energy scales where new physics is needed because GR is non-perturbative on these scales. We can calculate scattering cross sections in low energy quantum gravity using QFT just as well as we can calculate cross sections in QED. I would highly reccomend reading section 22.4 of Schwartz "Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model". There you will find a calculation of the 1-loop diagram for the graviton propagator corresponding to vacuum polarization and the result is perturbative, regular, and predictive. In inflationary cosmology we quantize metric perturbations to get gravitational waves generated by a scalar inflaton, just like we quantize the EM field. This is in fact testable by relating the power spectrum of these quantized tensor modes to the energy scale of inflation.

EDIT: this is also know as the effective field theory approach.
 
Last edited:
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top