What does QM hint about time-space?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter San K
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Qm
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores whether quantum mechanics (QM) suggests that time-space is an emergent property rather than a fundamental aspect of nature. Participants examine the implications of QM and quantum field theory (QFT) on the understanding of time-space, including references to electromagnetic fields and alternative theories like loop quantum gravity (LQG).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if QM hints at time-space being emergent and asks for ways this could be interpreted.
  • Another participant argues that standard QM and QFT treat space-time as a fixed background and do not provide insights into its structure, mentioning the difficulty in defining a time operator.
  • A third participant references other threads that may provide investigative perspectives on the topic.
  • A different viewpoint asserts that QM indicates nature may be modeled by generalized probability models, rejecting the idea of time-space as emergent and claiming QM is fundamental, with Maxwell's equations deriving from quantum electrodynamics (QED).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether QM suggests time-space is emergent or fundamental, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on interpretations of QM and the definitions of emergent versus fundamental properties, which are not fully resolved in the discussion.

San K
Messages
905
Reaction score
1
Does QM hint at time-space being an emergent, rather than a fundamental, property/constituent of nature?

In what ways?

Electromagnetic (EM) fields are assumed to pervade all of time-space.

Which is more fundamental?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Standard QM and QFT use space-time as a background, I don't think they give any hint at the structure or properties of space-time. Maybe symmetries are the only thing touching on the subject, but other than that...it's really difficult to define a time operator (as an observable), but I could be wrong.

However , from what I understand, with LQG, it's a whole different story.
 
San K said:
Does QM hint at time-space being an emergent, rather than a fundamental, property/constituent of nature?

No - it hints that nature may be fundamentally modeled by generalised probability models.

San K said:
Electromagnetic (EM) fields are assumed to pervade all of time-space

QM is fundamental - Maxwell's equations follow from QED - not the other way around.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
8K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K