Imagining particles, fields and interactions

Click For Summary
The discussion explores the concept of imagining forces in nature solely through fields, without prior knowledge of particles. It emphasizes calculating the Hamiltonian and momentum of these fields, then replacing them with operators that follow specific commutation relations. The conversation questions whether this framework could lead to recognizing particle-like behavior, particularly from the perspective of a classical field theorist from the 18th century. The idea is proposed that 'particles' may not be point entities but rather labels for processes that encompass their entire existence. This perspective challenges traditional views and suggests a deeper understanding of the nature of particles in quantum field theory.
quantumfireball
Messages
90
Reaction score
0
Imagine that you never heard about particle before.
For you the all the forces in nature are described by scalar,vector etc fields.
now you calculate the hamilton of the field and the momentum of the field
and you ill replace the the field say phi and its momentum by operators which satisfy the usual commutation relation {phi,p}=i which is equal to zero for space like seperations etc etc
Now do you see particle like behaviour coming out of this framework?
Be frank.
Just imagine
Mathematically it does make a lot of sense like you have experienced with the 1 dimensional harmonic oscillator but to treat particles as very real entities within the framework of QFT?
it makes sense now since we have read things,but what if you were an 18th century clasical field theorist and just randomely thought about this idea of field quantization
?
do you think he would recognize particles coming out of the framework?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand all of the above, but perhaps therein lies a hint that 'particle' is not a label for a point entity existing at a particular point in spacetime but a label for a process which encompasses the entire lifetime of said entity.
 
Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 87 ·
3
Replies
87
Views
8K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K