For nearly a century, the incompatibility between General Relativity (GR) and Quantum Mechanics (QM) has persisted due to the absence of a unified theoretical framework that seamlessly integrates both. GR describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime—a smooth, continuous fabric—while QM operates on principles of quantization and uncertainty, governing interactions at atomic and subatomic scales.
The challenge lies in reconciling these fundamentally different descriptions: GR breaks down under extreme conditions such as singularities, where quantum effects dominate, while QM lacks a mechanism to incorporate the dynamic geometry of spacetime.
A successful unification would require either quantizing gravity, modifying the structure of spacetime at quantum scales, or deriving both GR and QM from a deeper underlying theory.
This theoretical tension has also shaped the way we interpret astrophysical phenomena. A recent experiment involving a curved smoke layer illustrates how a spatially varying refractive index can bend and subtly magnify light, mimicking the effects of gravitational lensing. This raises an intriguing question: To what extent might refractive index gradients — such as those found in the Sun’s chromosphere — contribute to the observed bending of starlight?
If both gravitational curvature and optical refraction influence light deflection in celestial observations, the implications could be profound. It may reshape our understanding of mass distributions in the universe, offer alternative explanations for quasar anomalies, and challenge conventional models of dark matter. Exploring the interplay between gravitational and optical effects could open new avenues for refining cosmological models and deepening our understanding of the fundamental nature of space and light.
Please see at:
https://www.ej-physics.org/index.php/ejphysics/article/view/374/421
Dear Professor Vedad,
I think the problem stems from General Relativity being based upon the "Relativity of Simultaneity" which is in error. There are many proofs of this, by many authors. One is by Kılıç below,
Article The incompatibility of Einstein's relativity of simultaneity...
Gary Stephens Thank you for contributing. However, I am not a professor. I have already downloaded that article.
The CHSH Inequality (special case of Bell's Theorem) is developed based on two premises:
- Realism - Some aspect of a particle must exist before measurement.
- Locality - Everything is confined by the speed of light.
Since the CHSH is violated by observation, it means that one of the two premises is/are wrong. If some component of the particle doesn't exist before measurement, then there isn't anything to measure so locality must not hold. However, locality is the most fundamental premise of GTR introducing what is known as the EPR Paradox. Thus, any theory that is dependent on QM and confined to the spacetime manifold will have this paradox and not give an accurate logical interpretation of reality. The EPR Paradox is resolved in section 1.1 here: Preprint THE FRAMEWORK OF EVERYTHING (FOE)
Russell Smith The main concern of this article is not QM. It is about the missing items in considering the Gravitational Lensing, regardless of how you define spacetime, like QM, or inhomogeneous fractal, or whatever else. The recent experimental model involves light deflection through curved layers with spatially varying refractive indices. While gravitational lensing is traditionally attributed solely to spacetime curvature as described by General Relativity, these optical experiments suggest that, in astrophysical contexts, atmospheric conditions — such as refractive index gradients, temperature distributions, and atmospheric thickness — could play a complementary role in influencing light paths near stars.
Farhad Vedad I understand. The link that I provided establishes an index of refraction of space (page 15).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Quantum Physics
- Quantum Mechanics