Why does Physics have two different theories:
Classic and Quantum ( + SRT) ?
============ ========= ========= ======
Because:
1.
In CT time and space are two different mathematical objects,
and in QT they are one connected object (system).
2.
In CT mass and energy are two different physical parametres
and in QT they are joint parametres (in one particpe ).
3.
In CT rest energy of one particle is equal to zero,
and in QT rest energy of one particle is equal E=M^2.
4.
In CT the reason of motion is outside impulse,and
in QT the reason of motion is inner impulse of particle.
5.
The CT explains the change of position of one particle
(object)by Galileo transformation, and QT explains the change
of position of one particle by Lorentz transformation.
6.
The CT uses principles of causality and determination
to explain behaviour of one particle, and the QT uses
Heisenberg,s "Principle of Uncertainty " for this aim.

What is the reason for these differences?
The reason is one:
The QT discribes the behaviourof photon/electron
(in Vacuum and microcosm), and the CT discribes the
behaviourof of all other particles, objects
(in our 3D Earth space and macrocosm ).
The CT and QT are two breanches of one tree of Physics,
which we must understand and describe in objectiive terms
(and not be surprised by their paradoxs).
============ ========= ==

Someone seems to have a very loose grasp on physics.

"CT", the weird moniker you have chosen for classical physics, does not conflict with quantum physics, it is simply an approximation. Quantum physics requires complex calculations, and under most circumstances the answers you get are the same as you get with Newtonian physics. In the cases where they differ, quantum physics is right. It's not a case of conflicting theories, it's a case of choosing the approximation or the tedious calculation.

Most of your descriptions of "QT" are simply not found in quantum physics, they are found in relativity. There is a conflict between quantum physics and relativity, one that can not be brushed aside so easily as you do.

. . . and what is that problem?

Thanks.

quote:

There is a conflict between quantum physics and relativity, one that can not be brushed aside so easily as you do.

==================================
There is not any conflict between QT and SRT.
The all Laws of Physics are unit.
We can understant them.
Ask yourself:
What is first law of Universe?
The answer is : VACUUM.
And then you can begin to think.
Best wishes to you.

And... more nonsense, what a surprise!

Hint: I'm not talking about "SRT"

SRT , GRT and “ Minkowski space “.

SRT doesn't have a gravity field.
If there is no gravity field , the space will be flat,
and this space is called “ Minkowski space “
(negative 4-D united space/time continuum).
======.
Is the “ Minkowski space “abstract continuum, as everybody says?
I think this space is a real one.
I think this space is Vacuum.
Why?
1. “ Minkowski space “has no gravity field, but negative parameter.
2. Only Vacuum space has negative parameter : T= - 273.
3. And this negative parameter is united with space/ time ,
which are joined together absolutely .
4. And the second SRT postulate tells about moving
light quanta in Vacuum.
5. It is impossible SRT to be the right theory
and space around SRT to be an abstract theory.
6. If in our brain abstract and real ideas are mixed together
then the interpretation of physics must be paradoxical.
=======.
And in 1915 Einstein put a “ MASS “ in the
“ Minkowski space “ and it curved. Why?
And in 1921 A. Freedman put “ TIME“ in the
“ Minkowski space “ and it also curved. Why?
==========
If mathematician makes a small mistake in the
beginning of his calculations then after some
operations it grows into a big one.
And if in the beginning of sciences birth (Newton )
the abstract ideas were put into its fundament ,
then now we are surprised with its paradoxes………
……and we can create new and new theories for 1000 years
but the result will be the same - paradoxical.
===========================..