4 ms·
Yes, this is my thought as well. It simply does not follow that the two alternatives are a probabilistic stress energy tensor or a violation of the uncertainty
by BlackFly 8y ago
Yes, this is my thought as well. It simply does not follow that the two alternatives are a probabilistic stress energy tensor or a violation of the uncertainty principle.
Since quantum mechanics describes electrons as a field and not as a particle with position and momentum, there is always the possibility that an extension to the field or a function of the field itself can generate a classical stress energy tensor.
- teilo 8y agoYes, but that doesn't solve the problem. That is just another way of rephrasing the problem. A stress-energy tensor is still dependent upon position and strictly speaking is not a thing in itself, but a mathematical description of an thing/effect - in this case a graviton field or equivalent which is associated with the higgs field of a particle in superposition. The result will always be described via a stress-energy tensor, but this is a description of a result, not a cause. However this works out, we still have to deal with the "position problem" when it comes to describing the gravitational field of a particle.