reference request [Archive]

v. guruprasad

Nov3-04, 10:03 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>Hi,\n\n\nAs a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the\nkeynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the\nmathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the\nsame name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,\nDirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current\ntheories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also\ncriticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,\nremarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction\nof the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was\nmissing.]\n\nI would like to cite this paper in the context of some recently\ncompleted results, but it\'s been so long that I\'ve lost the original\nreference, including the exact name of the collection, the publisher,\netc. I would much appreciate if anyone could give me the reference or\na pointer.\n\n\n\nsincerely,\n-prasad.\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>Hi,

As a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the
keynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the
mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the
same name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,
Dirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current
theories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also
criticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,
remarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction
of the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was
missing.]

I would like to cite this paper in the context of some recently
completed results, but it's been so long that I've lost the original
reference, including the exact name of the collection, the publisher,
etc. I would much appreciate if anyone could give me the reference or
a pointer.

sincerely,
-prasad.

Arnold Neumaier

Nov4-04, 03:40 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>v. guruprasad wrote:\n> Hi,\n>\n>\n> As a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the\n> keynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the\n> mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the\n> same name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,\n> Dirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current\n> theories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also\n> criticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,\n> remarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction\n> of the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was\n> missing.]\n>\n\nThe forms of relativistic dynamics were invented in the article\nP.A.M. Dirac, Rev. Mod. Phys 21, 392 (1949).\nCriticisms of infinities appear not there, but in various other places,\ne.g., he said "interacting QED is full of nonsense" in:\nPAM Dirac, in:\nDuke and Owens\nPerturbative Quantumelectrodynamics\nNew York 1981\n(quoted after p.10 of Collins, Renormalization)\n\nFor more on the forms of relativistic dynamics see the survey\nB.D. Keister and W.N. Polyzou,\nRelativistic Hamiltonian Dynamics in Nuclear and Particle Physics,\nin: Advances in Nuclear Physics, Volume 20,\n(J. W. Negele and E.W. Vogt, eds.)\nPlenum Press 1991.\nThis survey was quoted at least 116 times, see\nhttp://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep?c=ANUPB,20,225\nlooking these up will bring you close to the state of the art\non this.\n\n\nArnold Neumaier\n\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>v. guruprasad wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> As a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the
> keynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the
> mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the
> same name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,
> Dirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current
> theories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also
> criticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,
> remarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction
> of the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was
> missing.]
>

The forms of relativistic dynamics were invented in the article
P.A.M. Dirac, Rev. Mod. Phys 21, 392 (1949).
Criticisms of infinities appear not there, but in various other places,
e.g., he said "interacting QED is full of nonsense" in:
PAM Dirac, in:
Duke and Owens
Perturbative Quantumelectrodynamics
New York 1981
(quoted after p.10 of Collins, Renormalization)

For more on the forms of relativistic dynamics see the survey
B.D. Keister and W.N. Polyzou,
Relativistic Hamiltonian Dynamics in Nuclear and Particle Physics,
in: Advances in Nuclear Physics, Volume 20,
(J. W. Negele and E.W. Vogt, eds.)
Plenum Press 1991.
This survey was quoted at least 116 times, see
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep?c=ANUPB,20,225
looking these up will bring you close to the state of the art
on this.

Arnold Neumaier

Caroline Thompson

Nov5-04, 08:21 AM

<jabberwocky><div class="vbmenu_control"><a href="jabberwocky:;" onClick="newWindow=window.open('','usenetCode','toolbar=no, location=no,scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,status=no ,width=650,height=400'); newWindow.document.write('<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Usenet ASCII</TITLE></HEAD><BODY topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 BGCOLOR=#F1F1F1><table border=0 width=625><td bgcolor=midnightblue><font color=#F1F1F1>This Usenet message\'s original ASCII form: </font></td></tr><tr><td width=449><br><br><font face=courier><UL><PRE>\n\n"v. guruprasad" <earthshrink@gmail.com> wrote in message\nnews:aaf50104.0410301654.3c47e0ac@posting .google.com...\n\n> As a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the\n> keynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the\n> mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the\n> same name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,\n> Dirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current\n> theories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also\n> criticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,\n> remarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction\n> of the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was\n> missing.]\n\nDirac said similar things in:\n\nDirac, Paul A M, "Directions in Physics", John Wiley and Sons 1978\n\nThis is a collection of lectures given in Australia and New Zealand, 1975.\nMy notes include:\n\nP36: "... most physicists are very satisfied with the situation. They say\n\'QED is a good theory, and we do not need to worry about it any more.\' I\nmust say that I am very dissatisfied with the situation, because this\nso-called \'good theory\' does involve neglecting infinities which appear in\nits equations, neglecting them in an arbitrary way. This is just not\nsensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity\nwhen it turns out to be small - not neglecting it just because it is\ninfinitely great and you do not want it!"\n\nOr you might mean:\n\nP.A.M. Dirac, The Inadequacies Of Quantum Field Theory, 1984, in\nB.Kursunoglu & E.P. Wigner (eds.) The Dirac Memorial Volume, Cambridge U.P.,\n1987\n\nThis was his last paper, but I have not read it.\n\nAnother late paper with the right title is:\n\nP.A.M. Dirac, "The Development Of Quantum Mechanics", Conferenza Tenuta il\n14 Aprile 1972, in Roma Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1974\n\n> I would like to cite this paper in the context of some recently\n> completed results, but it\'s been so long that I\'ve lost the original\n> reference, including the exact name of the collection, the publisher,\n> etc. I would much appreciate if anyone could give me the reference or\n> a pointer.\n\nI don\'t recognise your exact quotes in the book I\'ve read (the 1978\nDirections in Physics) but it may be suitable.\n\nCaroline\n\nCaroline H Thompson\n\nch.thompson1@virgin.net\nhttp://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1/\n</UL></PRE></font></td></tr></table></BODY><HTML>');"> <IMG SRC=/images/buttons/ip.gif BORDER=0 ALIGN=CENTER ALT="View this Usenet post in original ASCII form">  View this Usenet post in original ASCII form </a></div><P></jabberwocky>"v. guruprasad" <earthshrink@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:aaf50104.0410301654.3c47e0ac@posting.google.c om...

> As a grad student back in 1983-1984, I was much influenced by the
> keynote paper by Dirac titled, as far as I can recall, "the
> mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics", in a collection of the
> same name commemorating his 80th (or was it 78th) birthday. In it,
> Dirac had talked about what he called the "point form" of current
> theories, and about seeking a "(wave?)front form" theory. [He also
> criticised the "complacence" of physicists with cutoffs of infinities,
> remarking that the elegance of more basic results, like the prediction
> of the positron in which "mathematics had led all the way" was
> missing.]

Dirac said similar things in:

Dirac, Paul A M, "Directions in Physics", John Wiley and Sons 1978

This is a collection of lectures given in Australia and New Zealand, 1975.
My notes include:

P36: "... most physicists are very satisfied with the situation. They say
'QED is a good theory, and we do not need to worry about it any more.' I
must say that I am very dissatisfied with the situation, because this
so-called 'good theory' does involve neglecting infinities which appear in
its equations, neglecting them in an arbitrary way. This is just not
sensible mathematics. Sensible mathematics involves neglecting a quantity
when it turns out to be small - not neglecting it just because it is
infinitely great and you do not want it!"

Or you might mean:

P.A.M. Dirac, The Inadequacies Of Quantum Field Theory, 1984, in
B.Kursunoglu & E.P. Wigner (eds.) The Dirac Memorial Volume, Cambridge U.P.,
1987

This was his last paper, but I have not read it.

Another late paper with the right title is:

P.A.M. Dirac, "The Development Of Quantum Mechanics", Conferenza Tenuta il
14 Aprile 1972, in Roma Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1974

> I would like to cite this paper in the context of some recently
> completed results, but it's been so long that I've lost the original
> reference, including the exact name of the collection, the publisher,
> etc. I would much appreciate if anyone could give me the reference or
> a pointer.

I don't recognise your exact quotes in the book I've read (the 1978
Directions in Physics) but it may be suitable.

Caroline

Caroline H Thompson

ch.thompson1@virgin.net
http://freespace.virgin.net/ch.thompson1/