The war in Iran (or whose war is it anyways?)

A new twist on Schrödinger’s Cat could finally unite quantum mechanics and Einstein's relativity​

Joseph Shavit Updated Mon, November 9, 2026 at 7:51 AM GMT-5

A spontaneous collapse model explores how a simplified quantum universe could acquire a definite geometry without an outside observer. (CREDIT: The Brighter Side of News)

  • A theoretical study applies spontaneous wavefunction collapse to a simplified model of cosmic geometry.
  • Its modified dynamics can narrow a superposition toward one definite geometry without an outside observer.
  • A study in the Journal of High Energy Physics provides a possible mechanism, not experimental proof or a complete theory of quantum gravity.
Quantum mechanics allows a system's state to combine several possibilities. Yet the universe we observe has a definite large-scale geometry. Explaining how those descriptions fit together remains a difficult question, especially when the system under discussion includes everything, leaving no outside observer to make a measurement.
A study published in the Journal of High Energy Physics193) explores one possible answer. Matteo Carlesso and José Luis Gaona-Reyes, affiliated with the University of Trieste, worked with Lucía Menéndez-Pidal and Mir Faizal to examine spontaneous collapse models in quantum cosmology.


Einstein groped for his GUT (Grand Unified Theory).
Even laymen can take some comfort knowing there's a set of scientific rules that govern reality, and even if the layman doesn't know the rules, he knows someone does.

Such laymen may go near as wobbly as Einstein knowing, there is NOT one set of rules that govern reality, but at least 3 sets of incompatible rules.

Sir Isaac Newton's 3 laws of motion are familiar to us from daily experience, billiard cue ownership not required.
Quantum physics applies to the very small, but differs from Newton's 3.
And Einstein's relativity, different from the other two. “Gravity slows down time … speed slows down time ...” astronomer Bob Berman

Uniting quantum mechanics and Einstein's relativity appeals to the human bias preferring closure, completion.

We can understand the allure. For now a will-o'-the-wisp I suspect.

In theory I have a degree in physics, but it was before all that string theory stuff.
I keep hearing about attempts to unify Newtonian, Quantum, and Relativistic physics, but it seems distant to me.
 
"but it was before all that string theory stuff." R5 #501
It may be decades since I peeked at string theory.
I ignored it after I read a scientific analysis of it that dismissed it as non-scientific, untestable, etc.

"I keep hearing about attempts to unify Newtonian, Quantum, and Relativistic physics, but it seems distant to me." R5 #501
It's just one more thing you have in common with Einstein.

Humans may have an emotional predisposition to hope for, believe there may be a GUT.
I wouldn't count on it.
Instead, I believe the more sensible approach (at least for now) is,
line them up as if a single continuous range based on something quantifiable like linear distance, from Ångströms to light-years.
Then analyze the boundaries, the interfaces, where the rules of one fade, yielding to the next.

That may not produce a GUT. But it may help clarify.
 
It may be decades since I peeked at string theory.
I ignored it after I read a scientific analysis of it that dismissed it as non-scientific, untestable, etc.


It's just one more thing you have in common with Einstein.

Humans may have an emotional predisposition to hope for, believe there may be a GUT.
I wouldn't count on it.
Instead, I believe the more sensible approach (at least for now) is,
line them up as if a single continuous range based on something quantifiable like linear distance, from Ångströms to light-years.
Then analyze the boundaries, the interfaces, where the rules of one fade, yielding to the next.

That may not produce a GUT. But it may help clarify.

Whether they come up with a Grand Unified Theory or not, it was not hard to learn all 3 and to switch between when told to.
But I wish I had a better feel for the whole reality.
Like how can a big-bang happen from nothing, or is it really a constantly repeating expansion and contraction?
Or is every black-hole, each its own big-bang?
Not that it matters that much to me anymore anyway.
But it would be interesting to know.
 
An overseas perspective:

View attachment 7252
EXPLAINER
News|US-Israel war on Iran

Rubio backs blockade, Vance wants deal: Is Trump’s team split on Iran war?​

Torn between more military action and diplomacy, US appears to settle for drawn-out economic pressure campaign, blockade.

Not only does the blockade seem illegal to me, but also expensive.
I personally think we should give Iran a couple of nukes as reparations for all the harm we did to Iran since 1953.
 
Back
Top