Recent content by gentzen

See https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/understanding-barandes-microscopic-theory-of-causality.1080105/post-7302909, especially I won't say "go read the paper," especially since I only read the first third of that paper. I guess it is a good paper, and I should read the other two thirds too...

Try to become familiar with differential equations first. Then try to become familiar with Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors of symmetric matrices, i.e. diagonalization. Next extent from symmetric matrices to Hermitian matrices, and from Hermitian matrices to self-adjoint operators. That last step is...

Padmanabhan's paper "Obtaining the Non-relativistic Quantum Mechanics from Quantum Field Theory: Issues, Folklores and Facts" (https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.06605) is long (58 pages) and substantial, therefore it deserves its own thread. Here is a recent discussion about Padmanabhan's paper in an...

Art Hobson certainly makes strong claims: Whether his evidence is strong enough to back those claims might be a topic for another thread. I haven't found a review of his latest book yet, but some of his related papers and "letter to editor" did cause some reactions.

https://web.archive.org/web/20250621015925/https://www.physics.usu.edu/torre/3700_Spring_2015/What_is_a_photon.pdf

I guess you both are making the third step before the first. If you are in a high energy particle physics context and study an effect like Compton scattering, then Lorentz covariance is relevant (and useful) and the photon behaves as a spin-one particle. But if you are in a quantum chemistry or...

From Coecke B, Kissinger A. Picturing Quantum Processes: A First Course in Quantum Theory and Diagrammatic Reasoning. Cambridge University Press; 2017.

Lack of "causal power" means something slightly different than lack of causality. Lack of "causal power" occurs for example if trajectories in Bohmian mechanics are allowed to be discontinuous, but without specifying any rules for the discontinuities. Or rather, the only rule for the...

ETH, Ithaca, ...?

What I understood from https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/35118/can-the-montevideo-interpretation-of-quantum-mechanics-do-what-it-claims is

Yes, in "quantum foundations". That is why I said "normally": This is about understanding Barandes' motivations, not necessarily about agreeing with him.

Here is Barandes' own definition from the abstract:

If you want to read something recent from Jacob Barandes, I would rather go with Barandes certainly has his reasons why he proposed his "indivisible stochastic process" interpretation: A wavefunction in configuration space is not a thing we would normally call "real". So he goes with a...

I didn't know that Omnes takes that position (or has taken that position at some point in the past). So when you group Griffiths with Hartle, you are basically just objecting to the common grouping of Omnes and Griffiths?

Not for me. The worst offender is Depending on how one interprets this, either all proponents of CH would trivially agree with it, or else even Robert Griffiths would strongly disagree. I guess you had the interpretation in mind were everybody would trivially agree. But on the other hand, you...