The Basic Conflict Between the Concepts of General Relativity and of Quantum Mechanics

Mendel Sachs

Philosophy of Science Classical Precursors for the Concepts of Modern Physics Nineteenth-Century Physics: Atomism and Continuity Early Anomalies and Elementary Particles From the Old Quantum Theory to Quantum Mechanics Quantum Mechanics: Heisenberg's Matrix Mechanics and the Copenhagen School Concepts of the Theory of Relativity From Special to General Relativity The Universe Conflicts in the Foundations of the Quantum and Relativity Theories.

Tariq Khan

Hitoshi Kitada, Lancelot R. Fletcher

The notions of time in the theories of Newton and Einstein are reviewed so that certain of their assumptions are clarified. These assumptions will be seen as the causes of the incompatibility between the two different ways of understanding time, and seen to be philosophical hypotheses, rather than purely scientific ones. The conflict between quantum mechanics and (general) relativity is shown to be a consequence of retaining the Newtonian conception of time in the context of quantum mechanics. As a remedy for this conflict, an alternative definition of time -- earlier presented in Kitada 1994a and 1994b -- is reviewed with less mathematics and more emphasis on its philosophical aspects. Based on this revised understanding of time it is shown that quantum mechanics and general relativity are reconciled while preserving the current mathematical formulations of both theories.

Tirupattur Srinivasan Natarajan

Timothy Speed

The persistent incompatibility between quantum mechanics (QM) and general relativity (GR) is commonly treated in physics as a technical or mathematical problem. Either a deeper dynamics is sought that connects both theories, or a formal meta-theory that unifies their concepts.This paper proposes a different reading. It claims neither a unification nor a correction of the existing theories. Instead, it shows that the contradiction between QM and GR is not a deficit of the theories themselves, but the consequence of an unspoken ontological omission: the lack of a determination of the transition from possibility to facticity.At the center stands the thesis that quantum mechanics and relativity mutually imply one another without being connected by a process, a path, or a shared dynamics. The transition between openness and stability is not a physical event within the world, but a shift in the conditions under which a world can occur at all.Using the terms indimergence and shift of being (Seinsverschiebung), this transition is specified as a boundary structure: indimergence designates the non-dynamical coercion toward objectivity, while shift of being denotes the irreversible change of the conditions of further world-formation. From this perspective, it becomes intelligible why the conflict between QM and GR cannot be “solved” — and why precisely therein lies its ontological significance.