Possible quantum implications of GR?

  • Thread starter Thread starter michael879
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gr Quantum
michael879
Messages
696
Reaction score
7
So after hearing a few theories, I had this idea that seems to make some sense. The problem is that all of the math involved is waaaay beyond anything I've done, and I don't even know where to start. So basically I have this theory that seems to make a lot of qualitative sense but I have no way to analyze is mathematically.

The "theory" that got me thinking about this is that all the fundamental particles (or only massive ones? Not sure on the details since its not a real theory) are black holes. Doing the math, they would turn out to be naked ring singularities (suprising connection to string theory there although possible coincidental). That fact is what makes this not a theory, because of the censorship hypothesis.

However, I came across the backward causation interpretation of QM which got me thinking about this again. I don't know the real details of this interpretation (I have an open thread in the QM section), but from what I've read the EPR "paradox" can be explained by backward causation (this is the only interpretation that actually fixes faster than light travel even though they all fix FTL information travel). Since naked singularities are capable of this phenemona, it seems like a possiblity.

Another bit of evidence is that closed time-like curves turn out deterministic universe into a non-deterministic one.

I realize all of this is pretty much meaningless but there is a suprising connection between GR and QM through this "theory" so I was wondering what people thought?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
michael879 said:
I realize all of this is pretty much meaningless
That is the only part I see anyone agreeing with.
What does it mean to “turn out deterministic universe” ?.

Maybe if you could discribe in detail just one “suprising connection between ……” and show how you think it is “evidence” of just what?

And someone might be able to make a comment.
 
Last edited:
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top