Abstract
The twentieth century saw two fundamental revolutions in physics—relativity and quantum. Daily use of these theories can numb the sense of wonder at their immense empirical success. Does their instrumental effectiveness stand on the rock of secure concepts or the sand of unresolved fundamentals? Does measuring a quantum system probe, or even create, reality or merely change belief? Must relativity and quantum theory just coexist or might we find a new theory which unifies the two? To bring such questions into sharper focus, we convened a conference on Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality. Some issues remain as controversial as ever, but some are being nudged by theory's secret weapon of experiment.
Highlights
The achievements of twentieth century physicsMuch of the history of twentieth century physics is the story of the consolidation of the relativity and quantum revolutions, with their basic postulates being applied ever more widely
Scales of a fraction of a metre or more)? Is there an upper limit to the scale on which quantum theory should be expected to work? There is a sense in which all properties of matter are quantum mechanical
New quantum mechanical models are being developed for a growing range of superconductors, magnets, multiferroics and topological insulators
Summary
Much of the history of twentieth century physics is the story of the consolidation of the relativity and quantum revolutions, with their basic postulates being applied ever more widely. It is possible to forget how contingent, surprising, it is that the basic postulates of relativity and quantum theory have proved to be so successful in domains of application far beyond their original ones. General relativity makes a wonderful story: the theory was created principally by one person, motivated by conceptual, in part genuinely philosophical, considerations—yet, it has proved experimentally accurate in all kinds of astronomical situations. They range from weak gravitational fields such as occur in the solar system, where it famously explains the minuscule precession of the perihelion of Mercury (43” of arc per century) that was unaccounted for by Newtonian theory, to fields.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
