Penrose interpretation of quantum gravity

[relativityfan]

hi,

what do you think of the Penrose interpretation of quantum gravity, that gravity is responsible of the transitions between the quantum world and the macroscopic world?

 

[Fra]

I think the general association between gravity and collapse is interesting, but I don't share Penrose vision that somehow gravity should explain or yield and "objective collapse". I personally think it's the wrong way to understand it.

But if you turn the logic around, it seems more plausible to me at least that when a group of observers interact, their respective actions onto their respective environment (the other "observers") progressed by subjective collapses, will predict universally attractive force, that is emergent in the sense that spacetime is a mutual thing among observers that's beeing negotiated. Still that's an open question, but it's what I personally think may be the better way to think of it, which is also the reversed logic of Penrose.

Ie. the understand how gravity is EMERGENT when a group of observers are interacting as per a subjective rationality (and see from the subjective perspectives "collapses").

/Fredrik

 

[Fra]

But if you turn the logic around, it seems more plausible to me at least that when a group of observers interact, their respective actions onto their respective environment (the other "observers") progressed by subjective collapses, will predict universally attractive force, that is emergent in the sense that spacetime is a mutual thing among observers that's beeing negotiated.

Another way of seeing this is a little bit like a group of observers, each have a different holographic view of their common environment, that's encoded on their respective distinguishable horizons. The point is then that the information encoded on this "surface" is in fact subjective, and does not in the objective sense encode information beyond it like you usually think of in holography, it rather encodes the observers subjective EXPECTATION of the bulk info; and then the point is that as these "holographic pictures" interact, an at least locally objective holographic picture will emerge and so with it gravity.

So the idea would even suggest that holographic principle is also emergent. But this is formally speculative as well, but it's just my personal view. I've also been excited by Penrose thinking befor but come to realize that he has most probably revered the logic.

/Fredrik

 

[tom.stoer]

Is this still the way he is thinking about that?

I know his ideas from "The emperor's new mind", but I have never seen the reasoning in the last couple of years.

 

[Fra]

Is this still the way he is thinking about that?

I know his ideas from "The emperor's new mind", but I have never seen the reasoning in the last couple of years.

I don't know.

My characterisation of his thinking is just my understanding based on various things I've seen, books and some papers, but I don't remember what the date of the latest one was or if he changed his mind. But for sure the papers were at least a number of years old. I'm not sure if he is still active. He should be 79 now.

/Fredrik

 

[George Jones]

hi,

what do you think of the Penrose interpretation of quantum gravity, that gravity is responsible of the transitions between the quantum world and the macroscopic world?

I think it is interesting, but highly unlikely. See

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=910951#post910951.

 

[mhob]

It's depends on what doyou think fundamental ,GRAVITY or QUANTUM behavior.

 

[Fra]

I think it is interesting, but highly unlikely. See

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=910951#post910951.

Maybe you shouldn't give up yet.

Some of my own ideas are related to this, but it's too early for me to present details. But in short I think the way this could be analysed furhter is first of alla to reverse penrose argument; it's not gravity that explains the collapse, it's the random walk progressing by "collapses" that gives emergent forces.

Then I think this can be combined with some of the "gravity as entropic force" ideas, by considering a random walk at "collapse level" and use that as the very internals of any itneractiong process. So all forces should emerge this way, maybe it's also a way to take some of the feynmann PI computation more seriously (in particular the "physics of counting" that is essential in the PI, and also the main problem, since the main issue is to know what the physical measure is on the mathematical integration space)

Then question is then to distinguish gravity from the other forces, but if gravity is associated to the overall "distance" in information space that maybe helps and all other forces would be more like "noise" ontop of that. And only when the distances are short enough, the other forces become more dominant.

This would IMO require reworking of QM, although with a reversed logic that what maybe Penrose originally thought.

/Fredrik