Does Pauli Exclusion still make sense when the particle interpretation fails?

[petergreat]

Pauli exclusion says no two particles should occupy the same state. Alternatively, it says that exchanging two particles generate a factor of -1. This is a basic fact about a spinor field, as a result of anticommutation relations. However, I hear that in strongly curved space time, QFTs have no interpretation in terms of particles. In this case, do the above two statement of Pauli eclusion fail to make sense, since both of them involve the concept of "particles"?

 

[daschaich]

Well, your post itself says that "This is a basic fact about a spinor field", which doesn't seem to me to depend on the concept of particles. I know pretty much nothing about QFT in strongly curved spacetime, but I would be surprised if the Lorentz-transformation properties of the fields (which makes them spinors) or their quantum numbers (which define the states) were affected by the curvature.

I took a quick look at Carroll's section 9.4 on "Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime"; he only considers scalar fields, but concludes (page 401), "We see that QFT in curved spacetime shares most of the basic features of QFT in flat spacetime; the crucial difference involves what we cannot do, namely decide on a natural set of basis modes that all inertial observers would identify as particles." Any given observer, however, is able to define "particles" in their frame, which can be related to the particles defined by other observers in different frames through Bogolubov transformations.
http://preposterousuniverse.com/spacetimeandgeometry/