- August 31st, 2012, 11:35 pm
#99702
Anyone with at least a layperson's familiarity with modern physics is aware that 20th century physics' two towering achievements, quantum mechanics (QM) and general relativity (GR), are operationally incompatible with each other, and that the "holy grail" of theoretical physics for the last 4 decades has been to find a way to unify the two theories into a "theory of everything." Broadly speaking, the attempts at unification fall into two camps, M-theory (the superset of string theory) and quantum gravity.
From a purely philosophical perspective, I have long felt that the incompatibility between QM and GR stems from a wrong-headed conviction that physical theories must be capable of unification in principle. Admittedly this stems from my own anti-realist premises, but even if I grant metaphysical realism as axiomatic, I still think it possible that fundamental theories may be inherently irreducible despite incompatibility vis-a-vis each other.
Anyway, I stumbled upon a couple of articles that impact philosophical ideas this forum has discussed in the past.
msnbc.msn.com/id/48863290/ns/technology ... e-science/The first article threatens the foundations of quantum gravity by describing how photons which should have been affected by Planck-scale granularity of space-time were NOT affected as predicted, suggesting that space-time is still smooth (not granular) even at the Planck scale, at least for light.
lifeslittlemysteries.com/1795-accelerat ... usion.htmlThe second article describes a new theory that implies how the acceleration of the universe's expansion (discovered in 1998), and the proposed "dark energy" to explain it, are actually illusions caused by a far more local (and plausible) phenomenon. What really impressed me with this new theory is how circumstantial evidence has already accrued to support it.
From a purely philosophical perspective, I have long felt that the incompatibility between QM and GR stems from a wrong-headed conviction that physical theories must be capable of unification in principle. Admittedly this stems from my own anti-realist premises, but even if I grant metaphysical realism as axiomatic, I still think it possible that fundamental theories may be inherently irreducible despite incompatibility vis-a-vis each other.
Anyway, I stumbled upon a couple of articles that impact philosophical ideas this forum has discussed in the past.
msnbc.msn.com/id/48863290/ns/technology ... e-science/The first article threatens the foundations of quantum gravity by describing how photons which should have been affected by Planck-scale granularity of space-time were NOT affected as predicted, suggesting that space-time is still smooth (not granular) even at the Planck scale, at least for light.
lifeslittlemysteries.com/1795-accelerat ... usion.htmlThe second article describes a new theory that implies how the acceleration of the universe's expansion (discovered in 1998), and the proposed "dark energy" to explain it, are actually illusions caused by a far more local (and plausible) phenomenon. What really impressed me with this new theory is how circumstantial evidence has already accrued to support it.
Favorite Philosopher: Anaximander
- By Sanju Lali
- By Thrylix
- By Pattern-chaser