Re: I'm no radical

Article View: sci.physics

Article #4634

#4634

From: Matt Austern
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 1992 10:51

22 lines
1566 bytes

In article <308@mtnmath.UUCP> paul@mtnmath.UUCP (Paul Budnik) writes:

> In reviewing your posts it was general relativity not
> quantum mechanics that you said may require change at
> small distances.

Almost everyone believe this, not just Dr. Baez.  General Relativity
is a classical theory, just like (for example) classical
electromagnetism.  It is generally believed that at short distances,
it will instead be necessary to use a quantum-mechanical theory of
gravity.  

A great many people are working on quantizing gravity.  It is a
difficult problem, and as far as I can tell (this work is very
technical, and I am not involved in it) it hasn't been terribly
successful yet.

--
Matthew Austern                   Just keep yelling until you attract a
(510) 644-2618                    crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
austern@lbl.bitnet                faction, an army!  If you don't have any
matt@physics.berkeley.edu         solutions, become a part of the problem!

Technical Details

Message-ID: <MATT.92Oct5105109@physics16.berkeley.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!agate!matt

References: <1992Oct4.223546.9969@galois.mit.edu> <308@mtnmath.UUCP>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!agate!agate!matt
From: matt@physics16.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: I'm no radical
Date: 5 Oct 92 10:51:09
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <MATT.92Oct5105109@physics16.berkeley.edu>
References: <1992Oct4.223546.9969@galois.mit.edu> <308@mtnmath.UUCP>
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics16.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: paul@mtnmath.UUCP's message of 5 Oct 92 17:33:35 GMT

Reply to Parent Message