Soon, it may be possible to create ‘hybrid systems’, where both gravity and quantum effects are non-negligible. In the dynamical laws approach, we do not know how such systems will behave, because we do not know what dynamical laws will be. Is there a way to reason about such systems, in the absence of dynamical laws?
We do not know what the exact dynamical laws are. I see no reason to suppose that we never will...why would it be impossible in principle?
There’s a persistent problem in physics, where laws that apply at one scale are hard to reconcile with laws that apply at another. But that has nothing to do with “dynamism”, in the sense of an evolution starting from initial conditions. Both GR and QM contain dynamic and non-dynamic laws
If by would the constructor approach fare better?
In the constructor approach , we do not know know how such systems will behave, because we do not know what the constructor principles will be.The
We do know what an approximate solution looks like in the prevailing approach, because there is a natural hybrid system, ie. a black hole , that we are making progress with.
We do not know what the exact dynamical laws are. I see no reason to suppose that we never will...why would it be impossible in principle?
There’s a persistent problem in physics, where laws that apply at one scale are hard to reconcile with laws that apply at another. But that has nothing to do with “dynamism”, in the sense of an evolution starting from initial conditions. Both GR and QM contain dynamic and non-dynamic laws
If by would the constructor approach fare better?
In the constructor approach , we do not know know how such systems will behave, because we do not know what the constructor principles will be.The
We do know what an approximate solution looks like in the prevailing approach, because there is a natural hybrid system, ie. a black hole , that we are making progress with.