Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2001 (3):S382- (2001)
The quantum gravity program seeks a theory that handles quantum matter fields and gravity consistently. But is such a theory really required and must it involve quantizing the gravitational field? We give reasons for a positive answer to the first question, but dispute a widespread contention that it is inconsistent for the gravitational field to be classical while matter is quantum. In particular, we show how a popular argument (Eppley and Hannah 1997) falls short of a no-go theorem, and discuss possible counterexamples. Important issues in the foundations of physics are shown to bear crucially on all these considerations
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Interpreting Quantum Gravity.Dean Rickles - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 36 (4):691-715.
Similar books and articles
On an Intrinsic Quantum Theoretical Structure Inside Einstein's Gravity Field Equations.Han Geurdes - manuscript
Spacetime or Quantum Particles: The Ontology of Quantum Gravity?Peter J. Riggs - 1996 - In Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 211--226.
To Quantize or Not to Quantize: Fact and Folklore in Quantum Gravity.Christian Wuthrich - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (5):777-788.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads409 ( #5,923 of 2,171,932 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,556 of 2,171,932 )
How can I increase my downloads?