Does every possible path = every possible observer?

[Mike2]

I wonder if each path in a Feynmen path integral might represent another path from an observer in a different frame of reference. Perhaps if another FOR is accelerating, it may appear as if the path we might consider looks distorted from that other FOR. If so, then QM is accounting for every possible observer at the same time, of all observations at once must agree.

I've not thoroughly thought this out. Feel free to shoot it down if you'd like. Thanks.

[selfAdjoint]

Feynman doesn't have observers in his sum over histories. That's what's so strong about it.

[Mike2]

Feynman doesn't have observers in his sum over histories. That's what's so strong about it.
I take it that you mean that there is no restriction to a light cone, that some paths may go faster than light or even reverse in time, etc;am I right? Perhaps I should change the word "observer" to the word perspective which may not be restricted to a light cone. Or perhaps moving and/or accelerating reference frames is what I mean, a simple discription of a path from various (even wild) reference frames. I wonder if things like the spead of light would emerge as a result. Thanks.

[selfAdjoint]

I take it that you mean that there is no restriction to a light cone, that some paths may go faster than light or even reverse in time, etc;am I right? Perhaps I should change the word "observer" to the word perspective which may not be restricted to a light cone. Or perhaps moving and/or accelerating reference frames is what I mean, a simple discription of a path from various (even wild) reference frames. I wonder if things like the spead of light would emerge as a result. Thanks.


No no. That's not what I meant. I meant the observer dependence as in Schroedinger's cat. The path integral calculation, with the Wick rotation, is perfectly respectful of special covariance, of the "causal structure of spacetime" (i.e. lightcones).