south
- 91
- 20
- TL;DR
- About concept of wave-particle duality
How does the concept of wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics evolve when you move to quantum field theory?
The discussion centers on the inadequacy of the wave-particle duality concept in quantum mechanics (QM) and its evolution in quantum field theory (QFT). Participants assert that wave-particle duality is a misleading metaphor that lacks scientific utility, having been largely abandoned in favor of a more accurate understanding of quantum objects. The term "wavelet," often confused with wave-particle duality, is clarified as a concept from signal processing rather than a relevant aspect of quantum physics. The consensus is that quantum objects should not be classified strictly as waves or particles, as they exhibit characteristics of both depending on measurement conditions.
PREREQUISITESPhysicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of quantum theory and its implications for understanding the nature of reality.
It doesn't, because the concept of wave-particle duality isn't a good concept in QM to begin with. It's a common pop science concept, but it's not a concept that plays any useful role in the actual science.south said:How does the concept of wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics evolve when you move to quantum field theory?
What wavelet? Can you give a specific reference?south said:What happened to the wavelet?
That is a math question, independent of QM/QFT. There never was much connection between wavelets and wave-particle duality.south said:What happened to the wavelet?
Is the fusion of words wave and particle, proposed by a physician several decades ago, when standard .model wasn't developed.PeterDonis said:What wavelet? Can you give a specific reference?
That's not a reference. You need an actual link to a textbook or peer-reviewed paper.south said:Is the fusion of words wave and particle, proposed by a physician several decades ago, when standard .model wasn't developed.
Are you mixing this up with something else maybe? I only know the term "wavelet" in the context of signal analysis / engineering. Definitely the term plays no role in the context of what you are asking in the first place.south said:Is the fusion of words wave and particle, proposed by a physician several decades ago, when standard .model wasn't developed.
south said:Is the fusion of words wave and particle,
Although it's a popular metaphor and an OK visualization tool, "wave/particle duality" isn't a solid enough idea to build new theories on top of - it's more a user-friendly approximation of what quantum mechanics really says. Pillows are fuzzy, and tables have four legs, but when you encounter a sheep (which is fuzzy like a pillow and has four legs like a table) you aren't going to find the concept of "table/pillow duality" very helpful.
south said:Is the fusion of words wave and particle, proposed by a physician several decades ago, when standard .model wasn't developed.
The word wavelet has been used for decades in digital signal processing and exploration geophysics.The equivalent French word ondelette meaning "small wave" was used by Jean Morlet and Alex Grossmann in the early 1980s.