Re:A New Experiment Casts Doubt on the Leading Theory of the...
by JumpCrisscross on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @08:24AM
(#36309204)
> what we actually mean is that H2O bends spacetime a little bit less than the three atoms individually that made it up
You're joining special relativity and quantum mechanics in ways we don't understand with this statement, which I think is your point.
That said, I don't see why this statement should seem paradoxical? Burning hydrogen in oxygen is exothermic. Before, one has oxygen and hydrogen atoms containing some mass. Afterwards, one has the same energy, just distributed between the mass of the reaction product and energy. (Energy bends space-time.) Nothing suggests energy is poofed into another dimension.
> it isn't just near black holes that a GR-compatible microscopic theory is relevant
Sure. But black holes are where we get paradoxical and potentially-conflicting predictions. If we solve that conflict, we unify the theories in an observable way.
You're joining special relativity and quantum mechanics in ways we don't understand with this statement, which I think is your point.
That said, I don't see why this statement should seem paradoxical? Burning hydrogen in oxygen is exothermic. Before, one has oxygen and hydrogen atoms containing some mass. Afterwards, one has the same energy, just distributed between the mass of the reaction product and energy. (Energy bends space-time.) Nothing suggests energy is poofed into another dimension.
> it isn't just near black holes that a GR-compatible microscopic theory is relevant
Sure. But black holes are where we get paradoxical and potentially-conflicting predictions. If we solve that conflict, we unify the theories in an observable way.