Clearly any quantum gravity theory would have to account for the effect that he has described.
Not really, because this is a theoretician's hypothesis, not an experimental fact. Theoretician's don't have to account for other people's theories.
That’s something that may help to prune the large number of theoretical variations that have emerged to date.
Probably not, since we are orders of magnitudes in energy away from any experimental results that would allow us to significantly reduce the landscape to a manageable size, and another proposed property not yet seen by any experiment doesn't contribute to that at all.
>> Physicists have long known that a single quantum particle can exist in two places at the same time
Even with one eye closed?
I love all this stuff but I'm sorry, this sounds a bit like, "it's not important what the facts in evidence are, but the seriousness of the charge".
The reality is we can't KNOW if "it exists at all" UNTIL "the effect can be observed".
He says the change in this particle’s weight when it is entangled in two locations is just one part in 10^37. Inconceivably small.Being able to detect such a change then is like being able to detect when some plasma thief swipes one kilogram of matter out of a collection of 10 million suns. Inconceivable accuracy.
This implies that the scale is why they're incompatible, and of course that isn't true at all.
Since both theories are well corroborated by observation and experiment, there is obviously a more fundamental "theory of everything" underlying both.
We just don't have a clue what it is. There is some considerable chance that when (if) we come up with the TOE it will change things greatly.