Transactional Interpretation question

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter fruitfly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interpretation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics, specifically addressing whether an electron can act as both emitter and absorber of virtual photons at different times. Participants explore the implications of this concept for understanding why electrons do not lose energy while orbiting atomic nuclei. The idea posits that emitted photons could be reabsorbed by the same electron at a future time, suggesting a temporal connection between past and future states of the particle. The conversation highlights the challenges in adapting the formalism of quantum mechanics to accommodate this dual role of electrons.

PREREQUISITES
  • Transactional interpretation of quantum mechanics
  • Quantum electrodynamics (QED)
  • Concept of virtual photons
  • Basic principles of atomic structure and electron behavior
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of the transactional interpretation on quantum mechanics
  • Study quantum electrodynamics (QED) and its role in particle interactions
  • Explore the concept of virtual particles and their significance in quantum theory
  • Investigate the energy dynamics of electrons in atomic orbits
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics enthusiasts, and students studying advanced quantum theories, particularly those interested in the transactional interpretation and its implications for particle behavior.

fruitfly
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
In the transactional interpretation of quantum events, can the absorber and the emiter correspond to the same particle? Could an electron at time t1 for example, transfer a virtual photon to itself at time t2?

If this is the case, could this provide an explanation of why an electron does not lose energy as it orbits around an atomic nucleus? (by having the emited photons reabsorbed at future times).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The absorbers are to be in the remote past and future. I don't see how the formalism can be adapted to you suggestion. It is essential that the waves be "reflected" from outside the system.
 
But couldn't we regard the electron of the past and the electron of the future as a valid emiter/absorber pair?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Can I take the transactional interpretation seriously?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Graduate Quantum interpretations and indistinguishable elementary particles
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
Undergrad Is the Transactional Interpretation deterministic?
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Undergrad Universe thermodynamic equilibrium & Transactional Interpretation
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Graduate Transactional Interpretation Absorber?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Schrödinger's original interpretation
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
Undergrad About wavefunction collapse and explaining single outcomes in different interpretations
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
890
Undergrad Interpretations of diffusion in Quantum Mechanics.
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Undergrad Valid local explanation of Bell violations? (Pegg et al., 1999; 2008)
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Graduate The Penrose gravity thesis/interpretation of QM
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K