SelfAwarePatterns<p>A new approach for reconciling general relativity and quantum mechanics proposes adding some randomness in general relativity, making it less deterministic on small scales.</p><p>For several decades, physicists have been trying to reconcile general relativity and quantum mechanics. These theories, despite each having been empirically validated to several decimal places, contradict each other. The problem is those contradictions seem to happen in places not conducive to empirical investigation, such as black holes or the early universe.</p><p>Most of the approaches to solving this try to quantize general relativity, in essence to find a theory of quantum gravity. This is what string theories and loop quantum gravity try to do. And there are others trying to “build up” to gravity and spacetime from quantum entanglement. But these approaches, and others, all seem to have their problems.</p><p>The new proposal <a href="https://science.slashdot.org/story/23/12/06/0118223/wobbly-spacetime-may-help-resolve-contradictory-physics-theories?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">is to keep spacetime smooth and continuous, but introduce some random wobbles into it</a>. It’s an interesting idea, one which may be testable in the near future. Most physicists seem skeptical, but the ones I’ve read so far <a href="https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/possible-gravity-isnt-quantum/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">seem onboard with at least testing for it</a>. </p><p>If the idea turned out to be right, it wouldn’t be a case where general relativity, or classical physics overall, “won”, since GR would end up needing modifications. One thing I wonder is whether scientists would be tempted to regard randomness in GR as fundamental the same way many do for quantum physics. Or would it be seen as a new mystery to be solved?</p><p>I personally would see it as a mystery. But I’m saying that as someone whose intuition is that reality is ultimately deterministic. And that when we have a scientific theory with randomness in it, we need an explanation for that randomness. </p><p>But we might end up in a situation like quantum physics, where there are different “interpretations” on what’s going on. Many people like the idea of randomness being fundamental. Just as with QM, they might be more inclined to dig in and say that the wobbles are just the way things are. People like me would be left holding out for additional data, or at least new theoretical breakthroughs, to map that randomness back to something more mechanistic.</p><p>Incidentally, related to the previous post, it seems likely this would have implications for the many-worlds interpretation. That theory is usually seen as needing spacetime to be quantized. If it turned out, once and for all, that spacetime can’t, many-worlds might be falsified. Given <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/2023/dec/04/wobbly-spacetime-may-resolve-contradictory-physics-theories" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Carlos Rovelli’s 5000:1 bet with the proposing theoretician Johnathan Oppenheim</a>, I suspect it would present issues for relational quantum mechanics as well. Just a reminder that many interpretations of QM aren’t just academic philosophies, but scientific theories in an of themselves.</p><p>But it’s also a reminder that no scientific theory can ever be confidently taken as the final word. New data can always dethrone a reigning theory. And that there remains value in continuing to stress test the fundamental structure of even the most successful theories.</p><p>What do you think? Would you welcome some randomness in your general relativity? Or like me, would you regard it as a new problem to be solved?</p><p><a href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/2023/12/09/what-would-randomness-in-general-relativity-mean/" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">https://selfawarepatterns.com/2023/12/09/what-would-randomness-in-general-relativity-mean/</a></p><p><a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/general-relativity/" target="_blank">#GeneralRelativity</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/philosophy-education/" target="_blank">#PhilosophyEducation</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/philosophy-of-science/" target="_blank">#PhilosophyOfScience</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/physics/" target="_blank">#Physics</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/quantum/" target="_blank">#Quantum</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/quantum-mechanics/" target="_blank">#QuantumMechanics</a> <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" class="hashtag u-tag u-category" href="https://selfawarepatterns.com/tag/science/" target="_blank">#Science</a></p>