8 ms·
Where’s the incongruence? At a macro scale, anything that happens in time can be considered as a sort of wave that we perceive as an object because of the way
by nico 2y ago
Where’s the incongruence?
At a macro scale, anything that happens in time can be considered as a sort of wave that we perceive as an object because of the way we are sampling it
Even basic things, like when you measure your own weight, will vary throughout the day/time, but instead of considering them a wave, we usually just “collapse it” into some sort of average of observations
Conceptually at least, both models seem to represent the same
How are they not compatible? Is it a math issue?
- tahoeskibum 2y agoThe main incompatibility is that QM predicts that all fields have a zero point energy associated with each mode. However, GR predicts zero point energy will cause spacetime to curve. However there are infinite modes in QM, so now using this in GR leads to all spacetime instantly collapsing. However we exist so this collapse hasn't happened. The solution is the elusive Quantum Gravity, something that physicists from Einstein, Feynman haven't been able to solve.
- nico 2y agoThank you for the explanation What does it mean for “all spacetime instantly collapsing”? It would be amazing to see a video of a simulation of that