The above claim has ever been tested but it should have since it is the most obvious indication to base theoretical research on the topic.
Regretedly, the opposite has been done.
There are several stance against qg such as
"Because we can think of it doesn’t mean it exists"
and pro, such as
"unification is primr in physics so unless all physics is wrong/flawed this is a valid pursuit or possibility"
No. Quantum gravity describes the quantum fluctuations of spacetime, it doesn’t have anything to do with other interactions.
Nor is there any discrepancy between the interaction of electric charges of the same sign and that of electric charges of opposite sign, whether in quantum or classical electrodynamics.
The “quantum gravity”, of course, really exists, since Gravity is fundamentally nothing else than some fundamental Nature force, and so on QM scale gravitational interactions and states are “quantized” – as that happens fundamentally inevitably at interactions and states of all other - Weak, Electric, and Strong/Nuclear Forces.
At that all the Forces are fundamentally different, and so there cannot be “unificated”.
Though, as that rigorously scientifically shown in the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s Planck scale informational physical model, two main papers are https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391209088_The_Informational_Conception_and_Basic_Physics, [ in the paper secton 2.9 “Mediation of the forces in complex systems” can be passed since this is more comprehensively given in section 6.“Mediation of the fundamental forces in complex systems” in other paper below] , and
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367397025_The_Informational_Physical_Model_and_Fundamental_Problems_in_Physics
- really everything in Matter eventually exists and happens on the next after QM one – Planck scale,where at least Gravity, Electric, and Strong/Nuclear Forces act by the same scheme; more about what are these Forces see the 2-nd link, section 6.
That is another thing, that Gravity is extremely weak Force, and so “ordinary” gravitationally coupled QM systems [say, “gravitational atoms”] don’t exist; though some QM G-systems/structures rather possibly exist in some exotic [really only cosmological] objects, say, in “black holes”,
- see, say, 3 reDzennn comments May, 24, 26, 27, in/to phys.org article
https://phys.org/news/2025-05-primordial-black-holes-today-dark.html , where, including, it is shown that central compact objects even of SMBH can be made from observed now particles – “Big Bosons”.
The article’s comments line is heavily spammed, while reDzennn comments are heavily “minused”; both this is for the reason that has no relation to science – why? – see, say, last passages in SS post, May 21, in
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is-it-true-that-physicists-do-not-want-to-understand-quantum-mechanics/330 - including any information about SS&VT model above everywhere that is possible is blocked, or at least limited by any, in this as that is above, way.
Cheers
Yes there is a discrepancy, because quantum gravity is grounded on quantum mechanics and on the General theory of relativity, neither of which even recognize the fact that electrons are charged particles, let alone the existance of the repulsive/attractive electric force (the Coulomb force) known since 1875 to to be in infinitesimally progressive interaction as a function of the inverse square of the distances separating all point-like behaving charges, such as that of the electron and of the charged subcomponents of atomic nuclei.
The General Theory of relativity, based on inertial motion only, does not even recognize the existence of any force in the universe.
- Badges
- Science topic