Is gravitized quanta the solution rather than quantum gravity?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of "gravitized quanta" as a potential alternative to quantum gravity theories. Participants explore the relationship between gravity and quantum behavior, particularly in the context of how gravity might influence quantum phenomena and lead to classical behavior. The scope includes theoretical considerations and speculative ideas regarding the nature of quantum mechanics and gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that gravity could be responsible for limiting quantum behavior, suggesting that micro-gravity from everyday objects might play a role in transitioning quantum effects to classical behavior.
  • Another participant argues that certain quantum effects, such as quantum tunneling, have a near-zero chance of occurring at larger distances due to their inherent probability functions, without the need for additional explanations.
  • A later reply emphasizes that the understanding of why quantum effects diminish at larger scales has been addressed through the concept of quantum decoherence, suggesting that this is a well-established explanation.
  • There is a challenge to the initial proposal, indicating that the discussion may be based on misunderstandings of existing theories.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of gravity in quantum mechanics, with some supporting the idea of "gravitized quanta" while others maintain that current explanations, such as quantum decoherence, sufficiently address the observed phenomena. The discussion remains unresolved, with competing perspectives on the influence of gravity on quantum behavior.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on complex topics such as quantum decoherence and the nature of quantum mechanics, which may involve advanced mathematical concepts that are not fully explored in the thread.

bbbl67
Messages
216
Reaction score
21
TL;DR
Is micro-gravity what is keeping quantum mechanics in check, rather than quantum mechanics keeping gravity in check?
Usually we hear about people working on a theory of quantum gravity, in order to avoid the singularity in the center of a black hole for example. But what if it's the other way around to some extent as well? What if it's gravity keeping quantum objects from doing their greatest reality-defying tricks? For example, the theory behind quantum wave functions suggest that there is a non-zero chance that a particle that you think is near you, could be on the other side of the galaxy or anywhere really, just not where you'd expect it to be. In reality we can just ignore these nonsensical results, because the particles never get that far, and we find that even the chances of being just a few millimeters away from expectation is nearly non-existent. For example, quantum tunneling seems to only occur within short distances, never in large distances. At some point quantum mechanics gives way to classical physics, throwing all magical results away. Currently we just say that the chances of these things happening are just cut off by their own probability functions making them such low-chance occurrences, and nothing more than that. So the question is what's cutting off the quantum behaviour, and leading to the classical behaviour? I'm proposing it's gravity. And it doesn't even have to be huge planet-mass amounts of gravity, just the micro-gravity of everyday objects towards each other.

So do you think this is likely? Also do you think researchers should switch over from looking for quantum gravity and instead looking for gravitized quanta theories?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
bbbl67 said:
Currently we just say that the chances of these things happening are just cut off by their own probability functions making them such low-chance occurrences, and nothing more than that.
There's nothing more to say. Certain quantum effects, like quantum tunneling through a potential barrier, are so dependent on distance that they have a near-zero chance of occurring at distances above the nanometer scale. That's it. There's nothing more complicated to it than that. Nothing cuts off quantum effects, they just have an increasingly small chance of happening as your distances and scale increases.
 
Drakkith said:
There's nothing more to say. Certain quantum effects, like quantum tunneling through a potential barrier, are so dependent on distance that they have a near-zero chance of occurring at distances above the nanometer scale. That's it. There's nothing more complicated to it than that. Nothing cuts off quantum effects, they just have an increasingly small chance of happening as your distances and scale increases.
Yes, that's what I said in my original message, right now it's just assumed that that's the way it is, and there's nothing else to it. But why is it that way? I'm suggesting it's due to the effects of micro-gravity. Not even suggesting quantum gravitons, but relativistic micro curvature in spacetime.
 
bbbl67 said:
So the question is what's cutting off the quantum behaviour, and leading to the classical behaviour?
That question was answered some decades ago with the discovery of quantum decoherence. Googling for that will bring up a number of good references, but the math involved may be fairly daunting. For a more layman-friendly explanation, you might try David Lindley's book "Where does the weirdness go?" or some of our many threads on the subject.

As the question in this post is based on a misunderstanding (and is also pushing pretty hard on the limits of our rule about personal theories) this thread is closed.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: physicsworks, vanhees71, PeroK and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
14K