Does Multi Path Integral Formulation Violate Special Relativity?

cragar
Messages
2,546
Reaction score
3
does the multi Path integral formulation violate special relativity ! do we get speeds faster than c.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
the particles with speed greater than 'c' are no physical particles they have no meaning at all, i think they are introduced just as a mathematical trick to make thing converge.
 
cragar said:
does the multi Path integral formulation violate special relativity ! do we get speeds faster than c.

What speed are you talking about? Group speed or phase speed?
 
feynmann said:
What speed are you talking about? Group speed or phase speed?
Neither. He's talking about path integrals, which add up the probability amplitudes associated with each classical path, and some of those paths correspond to speeds >c.

The answers to the questions in #1 are "no" and "yes". To "violate" SR you'd have to be able to send a message with a speed greater than c. You can't do it just by breaking a mathematical expression into pieces and interpreting some of the pieces as speeds >c.

zetafunction said:
the particles with speed greater than 'c' are no physical particles they have no meaning at all, i think they are introduced just as a mathematical trick to make thing converge.
They are no less and no more real than the ones with speed less than c, and this doesn't have anything to do with convergence.
 
i see
 

Thread 'The Power of QM and QFT'

We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
View full post »

Thread 'Importance of Hanbury Brown and Twiss experiment'

I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
View full post »

Thread 'Quantum Entanglement is a Kinematic Fact, not a Dynamical Effect'

Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
View full post »

Similar threads

I Can a Path Integral Formulation for Photons Start from a Massless Premise?
Replies
3
Views
2K
A Lagrangian in the Path Integral
Replies
13
Views
2K
B Speed of light with quantum path integrals
Replies
3
Views
2K
I What do the authors of the paper mean here exactly by path integral?
Replies
6
Views
2K
A Orthogonality of variations in Faddev-Popov method for path integral
Replies
1
Views
1K
Understanding the Path Integral Formulation in Feynman's Theory
Replies
15
Views
3K
A Utility of path integral formulation of quantum mechanics
Replies
12
Views
2K
Relation between phase space and path integral formulation?
Replies
12
Views
3K
I What Do Phase Space Path Integrals Compute?
Replies
6
Views
2K
I A Closer Look at the Randomness of Quantum Measurements in QED
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top