The overwhelming success of general relativity for mainstream science's macroscopic reality of continuous space and time cannot be overstated. Likewise, quantum mechanics represents an even more successful understanding of our microscopic reality of amplitude and phase. All of relativity’s reported
successes, though, are really due to the two key notions of mass-energy equivalence (MEE)
and gravity time delay of light.
Lorentz invariance, the constant of the speed of light irrespective of velocity, simply follows directly from MEE and means that the
gravity deflection of light follows from both light’s gravity MEE and the extra
time delay of light.

Likewise, it is the quantum coherence of microscopic matter as amplitude and phase that is largely responsible for quantum's microscopic success stories. The quantum story is built upon space and motion, just as is the GR story, but for GR, space and motion do not apply everywhere in the universe while quantum amplitude and phase apply everywhere. In the GR or mainstream science, velocity and
acceleration in empty space make up frames of reference from which emerge changes
in inertial matter and time delays of light. Gravity affects light once as
light’s MEE mass and then again as gravity’s acceleration and red shift and so gravity deflection
of light is twice that of just light’s MEE gravity deflection.

Augmenting continuous space, motion, and time with the more general notions of discrete matter and time extends the validity of gravity to all of the universe. In a sense, this means that space and motion actually lie within the the domain of discrete changes in inertial matter and the time delay of light by gravity, not the other way around. In other words, augmenting continuous space and time means that the basic principles of MEE and gravity time delays still apply to that part of the universe. however, the spatio-temporal tensors of GR do not apply outside of the limits of continuous space and time and so a change in inertial matter emerges as motion in spatial frames of reference and it is from changes in gravity that space emerges from gravity time delay. Thus, space and motion are both within the domain of changes in inertial matter and time delays and not the other way around as shown in the figure below. The total time delay for light due to gravity is after all a factor of two greater that of just light’s gravity MEE time delay.

Augmenting continuous space, motion, and time with the more general notions of discrete matter and time extends the validity of gravity to all of the universe. In a sense, this means that space and motion actually lie within the the domain of discrete changes in inertial matter and the time delay of light by gravity, not the other way around. In other words, augmenting continuous space and time means that the basic principles of MEE and gravity time delays still apply to that part of the universe. however, the spatio-temporal tensors of GR do not apply outside of the limits of continuous space and time and so a change in inertial matter emerges as motion in spatial frames of reference and it is from changes in gravity that space emerges from gravity time delay. Thus, space and motion are both within the domain of changes in inertial matter and time delays and not the other way around as shown in the figure below. The total time delay for light due to gravity is after all a factor of two greater that of just light’s gravity MEE time delay.

Any model of the universe with both gravity MEE and time
delay will also be consistent with the observed gravity light deflections, but
there are further notions of relativity that do not necessarily follow from gravity
MEE and time delay. For example, GR lacks an absolute frame of reference even though the CMB seems to be an absolute frame of
reference and given an absolute CMB frame simply limits the scale for GR tensor algebra.

Also, the determinate geodesic paths of GR objects in a 4D
spacetime are inconsistent with the microscopic probabilistic quantum paths of the very
successful quantum action. In fact, the determinate GR geodesics in effect do
away with the quantum notion of time since time becomes just a GR displacement and it is the 4D geodesic paths that then
determine the futures of all objects from the initial conditions of the
universe.

In contrast, quantum mechanics shows by many different
measurements that there are no determinate geodesic paths for quantum objects. In fact, there is a fundamental lack of knowledge of certain quantum paths and a fundamental uncertainty principle limits all quantum paths. Yet despite
the limitations of GR, the predictions of MEE and gravity time delay corrections allow our GPS
satellites to work and explain the deflection of starlight and the time delays
of quasar radio sources by the gravity of the sun as well as the lensing of
galaxies by other galaxies. All of these measurements are consistent with gravity
MEE and time delays and so any theory that incorporates MEE and gravity time
delays will also be consistent with all of these observations as well.

The further notions of a lack of an absolute frame of
reference in GR and GR determinate geodesics are then both open to question and
neither has been verified by measurement.
The CMB does seem to represent an absolute frame of reference that then closes all motion in the universe and the well demonstrated quantum uncertainty does
seem to rule out any determinate GR geodesics. Thus there are still notable
limitations embedded within general relativity despite GR’s notable successes with gravity
MEE and time delays. Furthermore, as science better understands the universe,
the limitations of GR become even more apparent.

**Black hole singularities are inconsistent with quantum action**

Probably the most famous of all of general relativity’s limitations is
the notion of a black hole singularity. Given enough mass, light’s gravity time delay will
eventually be sufficient to capture light into a singularity and therefore stop atomic time at an
event horizon, two well worn predictions that simply cannot be the whole story.

**Black hole event horizons are inconsistent with quantum action**

A particle of matter that encounters the event horizon of a
black hole is subject to two quite different predictions; gravity and quantum. According to much of the
historical black hole modeling, such a particle simply becomes part of the mass
accretion and loses all information about its past.

More recent calculations find that, prior to reaching the
event horizon, a particle is ripped into successively smaller pieces until the very, very small Planck limit. Those tiny pieces of matter begin collapsing before they accrete and
therefore never actually become part of the primary black hole. These eternally
collapsing objects, eco’s, take the place of the primary black hole, but do not
really resolve the quantum paradox.

Quantum calculations predict something for a
particle of matter at an event horizon, tearing into matter and antimatter
particles, resulting in so-called Hawking radiation. The black hole event
horizon turns into a quantum firewall and just like with the eco, accretion action
stops near the event horizon. There just cannot be these two very different fates for the same neutral
particles.

**Proper time is inconsistent with quantum time**

Proper time is a key notion of GR and that proper time then becomes
the fourth displacement of 4D spacetime. Ironically, time as a GR spatial displacement
in effect does away with the uncertainty of time. Because all motion in GR
occurs as a result of gravity along determinate geodesic paths, the future is completely
determined by the past.

Quantum time, on the other hand, is both reversible and
uncertain and there is no stopping quantum time at a GR event horizon or anywhere else in the universe. However,
time is simply a quantum progress variable and there is therefore no quantum expectation
value for a time duration or delay.

It is clear that the future for a given object simply cannot
be both deterministic by the principles of GR and probabilistic by the
principles of QM and it is likely that both GR and quantum times will therefore need
some kind of augmentation.

**Dark matter and dark energy not explained**

Dark matter is an extra gravity correction that explains the
stabilities of galaxies and galaxy clusters while dark energy is yet another
gravity correction needed to hold the universe together as the CMB. The absence
of any sign of these gravity corrections in GR is a little disconcerting and
seems like a major flaw of GR to simply invent matter and energy objects.

**Determinate geodesics inconsistent with quantum action**

One of the basic assumptions of GR is that gravity action
distorts or curves the 4D spacetime and that objects simply follow
predetermined geodesics as minimum energy paths. Of course, quantum action not
only does not distort 4D spacetime, quantum action results in likely but not determinate
futures. In quantum gravity, there will very likely be a number of possible futures
instead of a determinate one.

**Lack of amplitude, phase coherence, interference, and entanglement**

Our quantum reality depends on both the phase as well as the
amplitude of matter. However, gravity force in GR only deals with the norms of quadrupole matter and time and so there is no role for phase coherence or interference or entanglement with gravity.
Since all of these notions of amplitude and phase figure prominently in quantum action, it is a major flaw in GR that there is no corresponding quantum monopole or quadrupole gravity to complete our quantum reality of dipole charge.

**Planck limit inconsistent with quantum uncertainty principle**

Once a particle gets small enough, its own gravity will collapse it into a
microscopic event horizon where time stops and quantum action does not apply.
But quantum action functions everywhere in the universe, even inside of black
holes and there is no stopping quantum time. Quantum action limits the
divisibility of matter and space to the uncertainty principle and to the quark, but there is still something wrong with quantum time.

**No absolute frame in GR**

The basic relativistic tensor math of GR depends on the
absence of an absolute frame of reference within continuous space and time. However, the CMB seems to represent
just such an absolute frame of reference for everywhere in the universe. In GR,
the lack of an absolute frame means that we only see light in the universe
within our event horizon or light cone and that there are past events that are now beyond that event horizon. For example, the universe expansion means that the CMB
will eventually move beyond our event horizon in about one billion years or so.

It would seem to be much more likely that the CMB represents
an absolute frame of reference that all can seen and that necessarily closes the
universe. We would not then be in an expanding universe at all and the CMB will
still be a CMB in one billion years, albeit somewhat evolved.

**Quantum time is not consistent with proper time of GR**

A determinate time in GR is incompatible with the uncertainty
of quantum time. Quantum atomic clocks tick very precisely but their precision
is limited by the uncertainty principle. Moreover gravity clocks that tick like
millisecond pulsars are also very precise and yet ms pulsar gravity clocks all
decay. While that decay can be largely due to gravity and/or EM radiation,
there is an average intrinsic decay as well of 0.255 ppb/yr. That intrinsic decay
means that ms pulsars tell two distinct times as their pulse periods and as
their average decay.

It is therefore likely that quantum time also has both atom
pulse periods and the same slow decay of atomic time as ms pulsars; 0.255
ppb/yr. This means that time actually has two dimensions; an atomic time period
and a gravity decay period and that two dimensional quantum time would then be
consistent with the two dimensional gravity time of gravity ms pulsars.

**Quantum space and motion are inconsistent with GR space and motion**

Empty space and motion in empty space are both infinitely
divisible notions that deeply underscore much of mainstream science. But while quantum
space and motion are both quantized, GR space and motion are both continuous
and it is clear that notions of space and motion are simply fundamentally incompatible
between QM and GR.

Many very smart people have worked very hard for nearly a
century to make space and motion consistent between gravity and quantum, but to
no avail. In fact, the notions of infinite divisibility for both space and
motion have actually been problematic since the time of Zeno of Elea, the Greek
philosopher of 460 BCE.

**The continuum of sensation of objects that fills time contrasts with the void of sensation that we presume exists as space**

Unlike the void of empty space, for which we have no
sensation, time is filled with a continuum of waves of sensations. There are no
empty

*voids*of time since all of light, sound, touch, smell, and taste shine continuously onto us and our senses with a continuum of sensory information about objects and their backgrounds. Our sensation of object changes and time delays result in neural packets of aware matter from which consciousness extracts information useful for prediction of action.
It is from this continuum of sensation that our
consciousness imagines objects and also ignores or renormalizes any background
time delays. Even though there are no voids of sensation in time, our minds
assign differences between object and background time delays to the lonely
nothing of empty space. Space emerges to keep object sensations different from background
sensations.

Objects that we sense have a different time delay from the
backgrounds that we sense along with those objects. Our minds use space and
motion to represent the difference in time delays as an absolute time or
Cartesian distance that separates objects from other objects and their
backgrounds. Space and motion, in this sense, simply emerge as whatever they
need to be in order to properly represent the object changes and time delays of
sensation, but space and motion do not exist in the same way that matter and
time exist.

Therefore, the lonely nothing of empty space and motion
within that space are notions that emerge from a more primitive reality of
object changes and time delays. The nothing that we imagine as space and the
motion of objects in that nothing of space are both simply very useful
representations of consciousness. Notions of space and motion help
consciousness keep track of objects and make predictions about the futures of those
objects.