New Scientist
Region: GB
Thursday 09 July 2026 12:05:01 GMT
18792
1009
100
30
Music
Download
Comments
Dan Ionut :
I agree, both theories are wrong...the fact that relativity works just as well if you consider the sun orbiting the earth is just mere fact that we are using our own biases to figure out how the Universe works
2026-07-11 05:37:51
0
saquiteve :
anyone betting on AI to eventually crack this theory of everything (TOE) conundrum?
2026-07-10 01:01:52
1
MixedBS :
when in doubt, thermodynamics
2026-07-11 15:08:31
2
Zayad Sada :
She is 100% right. Mainstream physicists have wasted nearly a century trying to quantize gravity just because Einstein and Bohr couldn't agree.
2026-07-10 14:39:46
0
casualobserver :
how many constants are missing?
2026-07-10 20:59:39
0
dr ir Wim T Klooster :
the main issue here is that gravity does not exist as such, but is a "byproduct" at larger scales. for a different model: relativity does not go far enough: mass does not distort spacetime, but mass IS spacetime. space and time are fractal. the universe is fractal, and evolving and expanding fractally, not like a balloon, but more like a tree. and a lot older than 13.8By. there was no Big Bang, there is no dark matter, no dark energy, no singularities. for new physics and cosmology, see Tiktok @wim2338.
2026-07-09 18:14:06
0
come_tf_on_now :
the universe is simple. it is an amorphous material heading towards the nonequilibrium maximum entropy point of the universal set. period. everything else is coarse graining.
2026-07-09 17:39:28
0
Cheshire147 :
yes general relativity is relative to what the observer is seeing cause things to manifest it already does our minds well most people can register places without seeing it....old saying seeing is believing well how strong can you believe a space maybe another dimension can guide your "conscious" realive to space in time not time in space ....clocks don't exist in space
2026-07-10 00:32:22
0
David Atkin :
space time exists within consciousness. not the other way round.
2026-07-09 12:33:18
0
Christian C :
why are just sticking with those 2? it could be a third, fourth or as many, issue is how many we need to go to find what we set as the "right", and even after that we'll find is not. long life spam to sort
2026-07-09 15:43:02
0
sunnygrit :
If we can’t perceive dark matter the problem seems dimensional? The fish in the pond can’t solve the issue?
2026-07-10 18:14:48
0
Vendel :
The universe doesn't care, it's just like these Ai LLM's all talk and understanding but when you drill them it's always. I'm not here. I have no consiousness and I'm just a dead pattern recognition engine.
2026-07-09 19:47:17
0
VladdyDaddy :
Amen
2026-07-10 04:13:57
0
doadhd :
600
2026-07-10 03:36:32
0
👤 :
Just because you haven't doesn't mean you cant
2026-07-10 15:43:02
0
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar :
Wave function collapse only occurs in some interpretations of QM though. Many worlds is the more widely accepted one anyway now, and that's doesn't have wave function collapse
2026-07-09 20:42:07
0
kls :
We could unify them with an espresso.
2026-07-11 17:16:27
0
Bardia Ahmadi :
I respectfully disagree. Quantum mechanics and general relativity are both highly developed theories with extraordinary predictive success. It seems unlikely that either can simply be modified to accommodate the other without sacrificing the features that make each so successful. I believe the solution is more likely to emerge from the geometry of space itself. In general relativity, the spacetime field equations are a consequence of the underlying geometry of spacetime, and gravity is naturally interpreted as a manifestation of that geometry. Quantum mechanics, however, appears to require a fundamentally different geometric structure. One might view it as operating on a "flattened" light cone, where all spatial points are, in some sense, accessible at a single instant of time, resulting in a causal structure that differs from that of relativistic spacetime. superposition and probabilistic behavior are both produced by geometry of quantum space. If these two domains possess distinct causal structures, then each may require its own well-defined operatoring domain, with a consistent interface between them. Such an interface could naturally take the form of a causal event horizon that separates the two geometries while preserving the internal consistency of each. This idea is plausible because nature already provides an analogous example. In the case of black holes, spacetime outside the event horizon and the region within it exhibit different causal structures, with the event horizon serving as the boundary between them. A similar geometric mechanism might provide the bridge between the causal structures of quantum mechanics and general relativity.
2026-07-10 07:41:47
1
Collective 🖤🤍🩶😇🌻 :
bottom up not top down. weee want to make top down work. but we needed to think small inherently. solve the problem by getting smaller and staying small physically to solve the problem from our scale.
2026-07-09 16:20:15
0
Luiz Guilherme Zamaro :
Roger Penrose's path is where science should be heading.
2026-07-14 01:35:26
0
Aryan Shabbooei :
so, how do you incorporating gravity into the picture? that's the billion dollar question!
2026-07-09 19:45:38
0
Uģis :
Wave function collapses when consciousness of an observer is involved.
2026-07-09 12:11:57
2
ghoulix9645 :
time is fractal, Einstein and Hawking wrong, gauge theory is correct, gravity is moving towards us ...
2026-07-09 12:24:33
0
Peter Wessberg 🇸🇪 :
The universe is very basic at its core level, cold and without any movment. Add a pump (to you dark energy) and you start to get movement. The rest is just math.
2026-07-09 13:52:49
0
To see more videos from user @newscientist, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
