Physical interpretation of Feynman path integral

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the physical interpretation of quarks and their properties, particularly in relation to the Feynman path integral framework. Participants explore the nature of quarks, their behavior under high-energy probing, and the implications of relativistic effects on particle interactions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that quarks may be better understood as "blob-like" entities rather than traditional hard particles, similar to ATPMs.
  • Others argue that when probed with high-energy electrons, quarks behave like hard bodies ("partons") that can elastically scatter electrons, influenced by relativistic effects.
  • A participant requests clarification on how the relativistic relationship between fast-moving electrons and slow-moving quarks leads to elastic collisions, seeking a visualization of this process.
  • One participant questions whether quarks or any particles have a definitive beginning, introducing a philosophical aspect to the discussion.
  • Another participant notes that some posts were split from the main topic to maintain focus on Feynman path integrals, while providing a resource for understanding partons.
  • A participant inquires about the relationship between the discussion of quarks and Feynman path integrals, indicating a desire to connect these concepts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of quarks, with some proposing a "blob-like" interpretation and others defending the notion of quarks as hard particles. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the foundational questions about the existence and nature of quarks.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of "blob-like" versus "hard" particles, and the implications of relativistic effects on particle behavior are not fully explored. The relationship between quarks and Feynman path integrals is also not clearly defined.

Mwyn
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
so I herd that atpms are actuall blob like particles insted of hard crystal orb like things but are quarks the same way? are quarks like blobs too?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When atomic nuclei are probed with high energy electrons, the quarks seem like hard bodies ("partons") that bounce the electrons back elastically, but this is at least partly due to the relativistic relationship between the fast moving electrons and the slow moving quarks.

When calculated from the Standard Model, quarks are standard quantum field theory "particles", that is, concentrations of field strength, strong in the midddle and tailing off outside.
 
selfAdjoint said:
When atomic nuclei are probed with high energy electrons, the quarks seem like hard bodies ("partons") that bounce the electrons back elastically, but this is at least partly due to the relativistic relationship between the fast moving electrons and the slow moving quarks.
Could you elaborate a little inorder to "visualize" (if possible) how this relativistic relationship produces elastic collisions.

Hope this isn't too off topic.

Thanks

Don
 
Last edited:
did quarks or any kind of particle ever have a beginning to it?
 
I split off these last few posts from the main Feynman path integrals discussion because they were OT for that subject.

As to an explanation of partons, I think http://www.pparc.ac.uk/frontiers/pdf/6F2.pdf gives a good account at the popular level.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can i say what is the relation between this subject and Feynman path integrals?
 

Similar threads

Graduate Does Feynman's path integral ignore alternative histories?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad On computing quantum waves exactly from classical action
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Undergrad Counterpart of Feynman integral in de Broglie-Bohm theory
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Undergrad How To Experimentally Confirm the Wigner-Von Neumann Interpretation
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
Graduate Sidney Coleman's opinion on interpretation in his Dirac lecture
  • · Replies 140 ·
5
Replies
140
Views
7K
Undergrad Can I take the transactional interpretation seriously?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Undergrad Experiment distinguishes Standard QM vs Bohm: Asymmetric beam splitter
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Graduate How do Feynman's many paths and Many-worlds interpretation differ?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
Undergrad Decoherent histories for Young's experiment (with and without gas)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Measurement problem in simple experiment
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K