Causal set theory starts out from a central result in general relativity according to which the causal structure determines, up to a so-called ‘conformal factor’, the geometry of a relativistic spacetime. Space and time, it seems, must be part and parcel of the ontology of any physical theory, of any theory with a credible claim to being a physical theory, that is. After all, physics is the science of the fundamental constitution of the material bodies, their motion in space and time, and indeed of space and time themselves. There are two areas in physics in which space or spacetime may emerge from something qualitatively rather different: wave function monism in quantum mechanics and quantum theories of gravity. The former case concerns a particular interpretative issue in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. The severity and the characteristics of the disappearance of spacetime differ from one approach to quantum gravity to another.
Causal set theory starts out from a central result in general relativity according to which the causal structure determines, up to a so-called ‘conformal factor’, the geometry of a relativistic spacetime. Space and time, it seems, must be part and parcel of the ontology of any physical theory, of any theory with a credible claim to being a physical theory, that is. After all, physics is the science of the fundamental constitution of the material bodies, their motion in space and time, and indeed of space and time themselves. There are two areas in physics in which space or spacetime may emerge from something qualitatively rather different: wave function monism in quantum mechanics and quantum theories of gravity. The former case concerns a particular interpretative issue in non-relativistic quantum mechanics. The severity and the characteristics of the disappearance of spacetime differ from one approach to quantum gravity to another.
Every vertex of the magic cube of physics discussed so far introduced a major element in the development of physics and the whole of science. Mechanics introduced the basic concept of equations of motion, or time-evolution of a physical system given certain initial condition and the associated idea of determinism, even with its generalization in the form of chaos, the dependence of the outcomes of the temporal evolution on the initial conditions. These concepts taken for many particles, or elements of a physical system, led to the probabilistic description of many particle systems, in the realm of statistical physics and thermodynamics, whereby the averages over time of various observable quantities were related to the ensemble averages, that involve classical, so-called Kolmogorov, probability measures, at least for certain “equilibrium” situations. The second law of thermodynamics introduced the concept of entropy and its probabilistic increase, the first truly emergent, probabilistic law in physics (temperature and pressure, being other emergent quantities, apart from entropy, the measure of disorder of a statistical system). In the context of Newtonian gravity, one gets, at least in retrospect the geometric description of gravity in non-relativistic, Galilean spacetime. Galilean relativity, based on the asymmetric mixing of space and time, with the absolute, universal time, true for all observers, gets generalized in special theory of relativity to observer dependent space and observer dependent time, viewed as “slices” of a new concept of spacetime, with the new concept of causal structure, that distinguish timelike, null and spacelike events. This in turn is made into a full dynamical geometric structure of spacetime with a relativistic description of gravity stemming from curvature of spacetime, and a dynamical causal structure, tied to gravity. In our next story, the story of quantum theory, we will encounter fundamental, intrinsic probabilities, that can interfere, unlike the classical probabilities of statistical thermodynamics, and which are consistent with equations of motion of individual elements, and not, as in statistical thermodynamics, with temporal averages over the time evolution of many elements. This is the big new lesson of quantum theory, that transcends the lessons of classical spacetime physics.
In general, a physical theory is based on some fundamental principles concerning space, time, matter, and the laws prescribing how matter is distributed in space and how it evolves in time, and even how spacetime itself changes in response to the changes of matter. The spectrum of the known theories is very diverse, since they are based on different assumptions. Some theories assume that space and time are totally independent, some that they are warped in a continuum named "spacetime", and some even that there are more dimensions than the usual 3+1. Most theories consider that space and time are continuous, but many recent theories consider them to be discrete. Most dynamical laws of fundamental Physics are deterministic, but apparently Quantum Mechanics shows that they may have an indeterministic component. Despite these distinctions between various theories, our intuition and experience tells us that they have a lot in common. In this paper I will try to capture the common features in a single mathematical structure. This is not a Theory of Everything, but only a mathematical structure which is common to most physical theories known so far. We will see that these theories can be obtained as particular cases of this structure, which I will call "world". In particular, the worlds described by the Classical Mechanics, the Theory of Relativity and the Quantum Mechanics are examples of worlds according to this definition, but also some theories attempting to unify gravity and QM, like String Theory. The purpose of this distillation is to provide a mathematical common background to both physical and metaphysical discussions about the various theories of the World.
The problem of time in quantum gravity is often presented as a consequence of applying quantum theory to general relativity. These notes adopt a broader perspective. We first examine how time enters classical mechanics, relativity, quantum theory, and quantum field theory, distinguishing three principal aspects: causal order, temporal duration, and the present. This analysis shows that the conceptual difficulties associated with time do not arise only when gravity is quantised. Tensions between causal structure, clocks, observables, and measurement are already present in the theories from which quantum gravity is constructed. We then survey responses to the problem of time across the principal approaches to quantum gravity. These include canonical and Wheeler-DeWitt quantisation, path-integral and histories formulations, perturbative and background-dependent approaches, causal sets, and twistor theory. The programmes are compared according to whether they retain an external time, render time problematic through quantisation, or incorporate causal or temporal structure into their foundations. Particular emphasis is placed on questions arising from quantum foundations and relativistic quantum information. We conclude by examining linearised gravity and weak-gravity quantum systems. This regime shows that the problem of time is not confined to Planck-scale physics, but arises already in attempts to provide a predictive and operationally meaningful quantum description of spacetime near flat geometry.
Introduction In this chapter we apply the concepts presented in Chapter 22 to a topic that has been of much theoretical interest in recent decades: causal set theory (CST). It is interesting and useful to review the status of CST relative to other foundational topics in mathematical physics that have been and remain of prime significance to empirical physics, namely, special relativity (SR), general relativity (GR), and quantum mechanics (QM). Those great frameworks are built on foundations that presuppose the continuity of space and time. Despite this, it is an empirical fact that we are surrounded by discreteness in the form of atoms, so it is natural to see how that discreteness fits in with the continuity of space and time. We have attempted in this book to show that the application of discrete principles to QM can go far beyond the basic Planck quantum of action. We have gone as far as discretizing empirical time, in the form of the stage concept. However, as far as relativity in either of its manifestations is concerned, the case for any form of discreteness has not yet been established empirically, although great efforts are being made in that direction in the program known as quantum gravity . We have particularly in mind the discretization approaches to GR of Regge (Regge, 1961) and Penrose (Penrose, 1971). Regge's approach is a classically based discretization of the Riemannian manifold concept, so has at best a generalized propositional classification (GPC) of two. Penrose's spin network paradigm started as a quantum description of spacetime and has led to much work in the area of spin networks in the hope of unifying GR and QM. However, workers in spin networks and related branches of quantum gravity have focued their attention on the mathematical complexities and hardly any on the role of observers and their apparatus, leading to a GPC classification of quantum gravity as one, that is, as mathematical physics and not physics. Claims made that such programs represent empirical physics have not been empirically substantiated to date; quantum gravity at this time remains empirically vacuous, despite the best efforts of many theorists over many decades.
This paper explores the fundamental nature of spacetime from the perspective of emergent causal structures, rooted in quantum mechanical principles. We propose a theoretical framework that treats spacetime not as a pre-existing background, but as a collective phenomenon arising from the interaction of quantum causal relations. By analyzing the constraints of causality and quantum coherence, we derive key implications for the emergence of classical spacetime geometry and the limits of local realism. Our results suggest a new way to bridge quantum mechanics and gravitational theory, providing a foundation for future studies in quantum gravity and spacetime physics.
The dissertation investigates some relevant metaphysical issues arising in the context of spacetime theories. In particular, the inquiry focuses on general relativity and canonical quantum gravity. A formal definition of spacetime theory is proposed and, against this framework, an analysis of the notions of general covariance, symmetry and background independence is performed. It is argued that many conceptual issues in general relativity and canonical quantum gravity derive from putting excessive emphasis on general covariance as an ontological prin-ciple. An original metaphysical position grounded in scientific essential- ism and causal realism (weak essentialism) is developed and defended. It is argued that, in the context of general relativity, weak essentialism supports spacetime substantivalism. It is also shown that weak essentialism escapes arguments from metaphysical underdetermination by positing a particular kind of causation, dubbed geometric. The proposed interpretive framework is then applied to Bohmian mechanics, pointing out that weak essentialism nicely fits into this theory. In the end, a possible Bohmian implementation of loop quantum gravity is considered, and such a Bohmian approach is interpreted in a geometric causal fashion. Under this interpretation, Bohmian loop quantum gravity straightforwardly commits us to an ontology of elementary extensions of space whose evolution is described by a non-local law. The causal mechanism underlying this evolution clarifies many conceptual issues related to the emergence of classical spacetime from the quantum regime. Although there is as yet no fully worked out physical theory of quantum gravity, it is argued that the proposed approach sets up a standard that proposals for a serious ontology in this field should meet.