A new unifying physics proposition (v1.0)

You may not understand the physics in this essay but the scientific method in theoretical physics stitched into the essay may be illuminating. Also paradigm shifts can shake loose major advancement in a field. 

Physicists’ best theory of matter is quantum mechanics, which describes the discrete (quantized) behavior of microscopic particles via wave equations. Their best theory of gravity is general relativity, which describes the continuous (classical) motion of massive bodies via space-time curvature. These two highly successful theories appear fundamentally at odds over the nature of space-time: quantum wave equations are defined on a fixed space-time, but general relativity says that space-time is dynamic - curving in response to the distribution of matter. For the past 70 years one of the most important problems in fundamental physics has been to reconcile quantum physics with general relativity. I had discussed in previous essays about both quantum mechanics and relativity and attempts to unify these two key pillars of physics. The most well-known approaches are string theory and its variant M-theory, and loop quantum gravity. I have written about the former before. But neither has made verifiable predictions and neither has been experimentally verified and therefore not an established theory and neither has advanced enough despite decades of work to factor in all observed physics in their framework. The "theory of everything" has been elusive. 

New theoretical work by Jonathan Oppenheim at University College London proposes an alternative: leave gravity as a classical theory and couple it to quantum theory through a probabilistic or stochastic mechanism. Such a hybrid strategy was traditionally considered a nonstarter, as it was thought to lead to inconsistencies. Oppenheim avoids these pitfalls, but at the cost of having to insert probability—a “roll of dice”—into the fabric of space-time itself. Future experiments could test the viability of this approach and students of his have proposed ways to test. Oppenheim’s stochastic coupling does not mix quantum and classical features: it preserves the nature of each system. For example, the coupling ensures no violations of the uncertainty principle in the quantum system, as well as no faster-than-light signaling in the classical system. 

Oppenheim’s proposal is in a sense very radical: it flies in the face of 70 years of accepted wisdom of the fundamental physics community. Yet in another sense it is very conservative: it preserves the classical nature of general relativity and thus neatly avoids the host of conceptual difficulties facing existing unification proposals. For instance, space-time determines the causal relations between events, and any theory that quantizes space-time faces the problem of what it means for causal structure to have quantum properties. But trading quantumness for stochasticity has its own conceptual difficulties. For example, Oppenheim finds that quantum information can be lost in a black hole, a result that many physicists might find unacceptable. There are also fundamental questions about the origin of the probabilistic jumps.

Further work by Oppenheim shows how his ideas above may evaporate even the very notion of dark matter. That would be another huge problem resolved!! See this article. 

Spacetime's "Brownian Motion" Could Spell The Death of Dark Matter (msn.com)

The fate of any proposal is experimental validation. But such validations at this level is never direct and simple. Instead, a theory proposal makes predictions - more the better - on what consequence of the theory will be observed if measured. It may take decades for technology and instruments to get good enough and for a suitable measurement approach to be crafted before the observation is made to validate. 

Quantum mechanics made many predictions - all validated. In fact, there has not been a single observation ever related to matter that conflicts with quantum mechanics. It is the most validated and successful theory in history.

Einsteins relativity also made many predictions. All of them have been validated. 

For example, relativity predicted that a light beam would bend in a strong gravitational field and predicted the amount of the bend. Many decades later this was validated during a solar eclipse precisely. 

It also predicted a precession in the orbit of the planet Mercury and the amount of the precession. You might have actually observed precession in a spinning top. This was also validated precisely. 

Very recent observation work further validates Einsteins theory. See https://jaykasi.blogspot.com/2024/01/einstein-validated-yet-again.html

The holy grail in Physics is the 5 sigma criteria when the level of confidence by Physicists in a theory being correct becomes extremely high. At any point in time though a physics theory is our best understanding of the universe until a better one comes along. 

The quest for unification goes on!!

Here is commentary on the proposal. 

Physics - Might There Be No Quantum Gravity After All? (aps.org)