Abstract Difficulties in meshing general relativity with quantum theory have prompted a widespread conviction that space-time is not fundamental but emergent. This raises a difficult ontological question: What is there more fundamental than space-time from which it might emerge? Rather than try to answer this question, this essay suggests that one reject its presupposition that emergence demands a precisely characterized ontological basis. Instead, it explores the possibility that space-time emerges in the domain of a quantum theory of gravity in a way that does not depend on objects, properties, or processes represented by that theory. How can a quantum theory of gravity help itself to talk of physical systems or situations without representing them in space-time? This essay shows how it can in a pragmatist view of quantum theory.
Abstract Difficulties in meshing general relativity with quantum theory have prompted a widespread conviction that space-time is not fundamental but emergent. This raises a difficult ontological question: What is there more fundamental than space-time from which it might emerge? Rather than try to answer this question, this essay suggests that one reject its presupposition that emergence demands a precisely characterized ontological basis. Instead, it explores the possibility that space-time emerges in the domain of a quantum theory of gravity in a way that does not depend on objects, properties, or processes represented by that theory. How can a quantum theory of gravity help itself to talk of physical systems or situations without representing them in space-time? This essay shows how it can in a pragmatist view of quantum theory.
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.
Based on a clear ontology of material individuals, we analyze in detail the factual semantics of quantum theory, and argue that the basic mathematical formalism of quantum theory is just okay with (a certain form of ) realism and that it is perfectly applicable to quantum gravity. This is basically a process about 'cleansing' the formalism from semantic assumptions and physical referents that it doesn't really need (we use the term 'semantics' in the sense of the factual semantics of a physical theory, and not in the sense of model theory of abstract mathematics or logic). We base our study on the usual non-Boolean lattice of projectors in a Hilbert space and probability measures on it, to which we give a careful physical interpretation using the mentioned tools in order to avoid the usual problems posed by this task. At the end, we study a possible connection with the theory of quantum duration and time proposed in [arXiv:2012.03994, arXiv:2107.06693], for which this paper serves as a philosophical basis, and argue for our view that quantum gravity may show that what we perceive as change in the classical world was just (an ontologically fundamental) quantum collapse all along.
Abstract The physical status of time remains one of the most persistent open questions in fundamental physics. In quantum mechanics, time appears as an external parameter governing evolution but not as an observable, while in general relativity it is embedded in the geometric structure of spacetime and becomes observer-dependent. Despite their empirical success, neither framework explains the physical origin of time or its singular role among fundamental quantities. In this work, we propose an emergent interpretation of physical time grounded in quantum phase. Phase is treated as a pre-temporal structural feature of quantum systems, rather than as a quantity defined with respect to an underlying temporal parameter. Energy is interpreted as a relational characterisation of regularities in phase structure, and proper time emerges only in contexts where phase accumulation can be compared and synchronised between interacting systems. An isolated quantum system may possess phase, but it does not possess physical time in the operational sense; time arises only through relational compatibility. This approach does not introduce new fundamental dynamics nor posit a physical mechanism responsible for the generation of time. Instead, it establishes an ontological hierarchy in which phase is fundamental, energy is relational, and time is a phenomenological quantity that emerges from stable conditions of synchronisation. Within this framework, classical reality corresponds to domains of temporal compatibility, while loss of compatibility underlies the emergence of horizons and geometric structure. By reframing time as an emergent relational phenomenon rooted in quantum phase, this work provides a coherent interpretative framework in which the absence of a time operator in quantum mechanics and the difficulty of quantising time and gravity are understood as consequences of their non-fundamental status, rather than as shortcomings of existing formalisms.
Introduction ‘The term “3-geometry” makes sense as well in quantum geometrodynamics as in classical theory. So does superspace. But space-time does not. Give a 3-geometry, and give its time rate of change. That is enough, under typical circumstances to fix the whole time-evolution of the geometry; enough in other words, to determine the entire four-dimensional space-time geometry, provided one is considering the problem in the context of classical physics. In the real world of quantum physics, however, one cannot give both a dynamic variable and its time-rate of change. The principle of complementarity forbids. Given the precise 3-geometry at one instant, one cannot also know at that instant the time-rate of change of the 3-geometry. … The uncertainty principle thus deprives one of any way whatsoever to predict, or even to give meaning to, “the deterministic classical history of space evolving in time”. No prediction of spacetime, therefore no meaning for spacetime , is the verdict of the quantum principle’. (Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler 1973) One of the few propositions about quantum gravity that most physicists in the field would agree upon, that our notion of spacetime must, at best, be altered considerably in any theory conjoining the basic principles of quantum mechanics with those of general relativity, will be questioned in this chapter. We will argue, in fact, that most, if not all, of the conceptual problems in quantum gravity arise from the sort of thinking on display in the preceding quotation.
Since the advent of quantum mechanics we have mainly been concerned with its predictions from the perspective of an external observer. This is in strong contrast to the theory of general relativity, where the physics is governed by the intrinsic properties of space-time. At the same time, the precise relation between space-time and quantum mechanics is still one of the greatest problems of theoretical physics. This immediately raises the question on the completeness of our understanding of quantum mechanics. Here we address the problem by making an intrinsic analysis of observables in generic quantum systems. We show that there is an extreme fine tuning problem for the emergence of physics from the Hilbert space dynamics. However, for any initial condition and Hamiltonian, there exists a special set of observables. We show that these observables are intimately linked to the natural configuration space in which an area law for the entanglement is inevitable. We argue that this implies emergent gravity.
I take non-locality to be the Michaelson Morley experiment of the early 21st Century, assume its universal validity, and try to derive its consequences. Spacetime, with its locality, cannot be fundamental, but must somehow be emergent from entangled coherent quantum variables and their behaviors. There are, then, two immediate consequences: i. If we start with non-locality, we need not explain non-locality. We must instead explain an emergence of locality and spacetime. ii. There can be no emergence of spacetime without matter. These propositions flatly contradict General Relativity, which is foundationally local, can be formulated without matter, and in which there is no “emergence” of spacetime.If these be true, then quantum gravity cannot be a minor alteration of General Relativity but must demand its deep reformulation. This will almost inevitably lead to: Matter not only curves spacetime, but “creates” spacetime.We will see independent grounds for the assertion that matter both curves and creates spacetime that may invite a new union of quantum gravity and General Relativity.This quantum creation of spacetime consists in: i. Fully non-local entangled coherent quantum variables.ii. The onset of locality via decoherence. iii. A metric in Hilbert Space among entangled quantum variables by the sub-additive von Neumann Entropy between pairs of variables. iv. Mapping from metric distances in Hilbert Space to metric distances in classical spacetime by episodic actualization events.v. Discrete spacetime is the relations among these discrete actualization events. vi. “Now” is the shared moment of actualization of one among the entangled variables when the amplitudes of the remaining entangled variables change instantaneously.vii. The discrete, successive, episodic, irreversible actualization events constitute a quantum arrow of time. viii. The arrow of time history of these events is recorded in the very structure of the spacetime constructed. ix. Actual Time is a succession of two or more actual events.The theory inevitably yields a UV cut-off of a new type. The cut-off is a phase transition between continuous spacetime before the transition and discontinuous spacetime beyond the phase transition.This quantum creation of spacetime modifies general relativity and may account for Dark Energy, Dark Matter, and the possible elimination of the singularities of General Relativity.Relations to Causal Set Theory, faithful Lorentzian manifolds, and past and future light cones joined at “Actual Now” are discussed.Possible observational and experimental tests based on: i. the existence of Sub- Planckian photons, ii. knee and ankle discontinuities in the high energy gamma ray spectrum, and iii. possible experiments to detect a creation of spacetime in the Casimir system are discussed. A quantum actualization enhancement of repulsive Casimir effect would be anti-gravitational and of possible practical use.The ideas and concepts discussed here are not yet a theory, but at most the start of a framework that may be useful.