Nature Magazine Publishes Comment On Quantum Gravity Phenomenology, Demonstrates Failure Of Editorial Oversight

I conduct maintain a headache and
blame Nature mag for it.

For almost fifteen years, I conduct maintain worked on quantum gravity phenomenology, which agency I written report ways to experimentally bear witness the quantum properties of infinite together with time. Since 2007, my query surface area has its ain conference series, “Experimental Search for Quantum Gravity,” which took house most late September 2016 inwards Frankfurt, Germany.

Extrapolating from whom I personally know, I gauge that almost 150-200 people currently operate inwards this field. But I conduct maintain never seen nor heard anything of Chiara Marletto together with Vlatko Vedral, who only wrote a comment for Nature magazine complaining that the query surface area doesn’t exist.

In their comment, titled “Witness gravity’s quantum side inwards the lab,” Marletto together with Vedral telephone telephone for “a focused coming together bringing together the quantum- together with gravity-physics communities, as good as theorists together with experimentalists.” Nice.

If they recall such meetings are a practiced idea, I recommend they attend them. There’s no shortage. The to a higher house mentioned conference serial is entirely the most regular coming together on quantum gravity phenomenology. Also the Marcel Grossmann Meeting has sessions on the topic. Indeed, I am writing this from a conference hither inwards Trieste, which is almost “Probing the spacetime fabric: from concepts to phenomenology.”

Marletto together with Vedral indicate out that it would endure peachy if i could stair out gravitational fields inwards quantum superpositions to demonstrate that gravity is quantized. They larn on to lay out their ain thought for such experiments, but their involvement inwards the topic acre didn’t larn inwards plenty to either await upwards the literature or real lay inwards the numbers.

Yes, it would endure peachy if nosotros could stair out the gravitational acre of an object inwards a superposition of, say, 2 dissimilar locations. Problem is, heavy objects – whose gravitational fields are slow to stair out – decohere rapidly together with don’t conduct maintain quantum properties. On the other hand, objects which are slow to convey into quantum superpositions are as good low-cal to stair out their gravitational field.

To endure clear, the challenge hither is to stair out the gravitational acre created past times the objects themselves. It is comparably slow to stair out the demeanour of quantum objects inwards the gravitational acre of the Earth. That has something to produce with quantum together with something to produce with gravity, but nada to produce with quantum gravity because the gravitational acre isn’t quantized.

In their comment, Marletto together with Vedral larn on to suggest an experiment:

“Likewise, i could envisage an experiment that uses 2 quantum masses. These would involve to endure massive plenty to endure detectable, mayhap nanomechanical oscillators or Bose–Einstein condensates (ultracold affair that behaves as a unmarried super-atom with quantum properties). The kickoff majority is gear upwards inwards a superposition of 2 locations and, through gravitational interaction, generates Schrödinger-cat states on the gravitational field. The minute majority (the quantum probe) so witnesses the ‘gravitational truthful cat states’ brought almost past times the first.”

This is genuinely remarkable, but non because it’s such a peachy idea. It’s because Marletto together with Vedral believe they’re the kickoff to recall almost this. Of class they are not.

The thought of using Schrödinger-cat states, has most late been discussed here. I didn’t write almost the newspaper on this weblog because the experimental realization faces giant challenges together with I recall it won’t work. There is also Anastopolous together with Hu’s CQG newspaper almost “Probing a Gravitational Cat State” together with a follow-up newspaper past times Derakhshani, which likewise larn unmentioned. I’d real similar to know how Marletto together with Vedral recall they tin ameliorate on the previous proposals. Letting a graphic designer brand a prissy illustration to accompany their comment doesn’t real count much inwards my book.

The currently most promising endeavor to probe quantum gravity indeed uses nanomechanical oscillators together with here. This grouping is almost 6 orders of magnitude away from beingness able to stair out such superpositions. The Nature comment doesn’t cite it either.

The prospects of using Bose-Einstein condensates to probe quantum gravity has been discussed dorsum together with forth for 2 decades, but clear is that this isn’t soon the best option. The argue is simple: Even if y'all accept the largest condensate that has been created to engagement – something similar 10 i M one thousand atoms – together with y'all calculate the full mass, y'all are all the same way below the majority of the nanomechanical oscillators. And that’s leaving aside the difficulty of creating together with sustaining the condensate.

There are another possible gravitational effects for Bose-Einstein condensates which conduct maintain been investigated, but these come upwards from violations of the equivalence principle, or rather the ambiguity of what the equivalence regulation inwards quantum mechanics agency to get down with. That’s a dissimilar even out though because it’s non almost touchstone quantum superpositions of the gravitational field.

Besides this, in that place are other query directions. Paternostro together with collaborators, for example, conduct maintain suggested that here).

Others await for evidence of quantum gravity inwards the CMB, inwards gravitational waves, or search for violations of the symmetries that underlie General Relativity. You tin let out a petty summary inwards my blogpost “How Can nosotros bear witness Quantum Gravity”  or inwards my Nautilus attempt “What Quantum Gravity Needs Is More Experiments.”

Do Marletto together with Vedral cite whatever of this query on quantum gravity phenomenology? No.

So, let’s accept stock. Here, nosotros conduct maintain 2 scientists who don’t know anything almost the topic they write almost together with who ignore the existing literature. They faintly reinvent an one-time thought without beingness aware of the well-known difficulties, without quantifying the prospects of e'er touchstone it, together with without giving proper credits to those who previously wrote almost it. And they larn published inwards i of the most prominent scientific journals inwards existence.

Wow. This takes us to a whole novel grade of editorial incompetence.

The worst purpose isn’t fifty-fifty that Nature mag claims my query surface area doesn’t exist. No, it’s that I’m a regular reader of the mag – or at to the lowest degree conduct maintain been so far – together with rely on their editors to give-up the ghost along me informed almost what happens inwards other disciplines. For illustration with the comments pieces. And allow us endure clear that these are, for all I know, invited comments together with non selected from alongside unsolicited submissions. So, about editor deliberately chose these authors.

Now, inwards this rare instance when I tin justice their content’s quality, I let out the Nature editors picked 2 people who conduct maintain no thought what’s going on, who chew upwards thirty years one-time ideas, together with omit relevant citations of timely contributions.

Thus, for me the worst purpose is that I volition henceforth conduct maintain to suspect Nature’s coverage of other query areas is as piteous as this.

Really, doing as much as Googling “Quantum Gravity Phenomenology” is to a greater extent than informative than this Nature comment.