3 ms·
Seems to me that you'd have to have a better understanding of quantum mechanics before it's applied to gravity, given that gravity is usually thought of on scal
by derbOac 5y ago
Seems to me that you'd have to have a better understanding of quantum mechanics before it's applied to gravity, given that gravity is usually thought of on scales much larger than QM. I'm having trouble explaining what I mean by that, but an entity like a star isn't a particle, it's a system of many particles, which is where people have trouble with QM — cf quantum computers. Seems like we'd have to have a better understanding of system - level quantum dynamics before really understanding gravity (or maybe understanding gravity would give leverage to something like quantum computing?)
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- meroes 5y agoInterestingly QM is also the theory of the very large. Entanglement is not attenuated by distance while gravity is. Also in aDS spacetime (closed rather than open topology, not our known universe) new observables would come into play which reflect off the edge of the universe. Also two black holes can be entangled.
- derbOac 5y agoYeah good point. By "scale" I meant more like "numbers of elements" or something, size in that sense more than physical size, although I guess I was kind of thinking of them as similar. But you're right that space size and numbers of things size aren't necessarily the same.