1: \begin{abstract}

2: \noindent

3: General relativity and quantum mechanics are conflicting theories. The seeds of discord are

4: the fundamental principles on which these theories are grounded. General relativity, on one

5: hand, is based on the equivalence principle, whose strong version  establishes the {\it

6: local} equivalence between gravitation and inertia. Quantum mechanics, on the other hand,

7: is fundamentally based on the uncertainty principle, which is essentially {\it nonlocal} in

8: the sense that a particle does not follow one trajectory, but infinitely many trajectories,

9: each one with a different probability. This difference precludes the existence of a quantum

10: version of the {\it strong} equivalence principle, and consequently of a quantum version of

11: general relativity. Furthermore, there are compelling experimental evidences that a quantum

12: object in the presence of a gravitational field violates the {\it weak} equivalence

13: principle. Now it so happens that, in addition to general relativity, gravitation has an

14: alternative, though equivalent description, given by teleparallel gravity, a gauge theory

15: for the translation group. In this theory torsion, instead of curvature, is assumed to

16: represent the gravitational field. These two descriptions lead to the same classical

17: results, but are conceptually different. In general relativity, curvature {\it geometrizes}

18: the interaction, while torsion in teleparallel gravity acts as a {\it force}, similar to

19: the Lorentz force of electrodynamics. Because of this peculiar property, teleparallel

20: gravity describes the gravitational interaction without requiring any of the equivalence

21: principles. The replacement of general relativity by teleparallel gravity may, in

22: consequence, lead to a conceptual reconciliation of gravitation with quantum mechanics.

23: \end{abstract}

24: