Is interaction first or field?

  • Thread starter Thread starter einstein_vishnu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Field Interaction
einstein_vishnu
without the interaction we can't measure the field so interaction should come first which is against the literature.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Euuh, what do you mean.

In QFT fields are used in order to describe the interaction. The particles involved (both fermionic matter fields as well as bosonic force fields) are the quanta of these fields acquired by the second quantization.

don't think that the interaction generates the field. The interaction itself is described by the field.

regards
marlon
 
There is no distinction between "interaction" and "field".

(That's really what marlon just said!)
 
HallsofIvy said:
There is no distinction between "interaction" and "field".

(That's really what marlon just said!)


That's a very efficient way to put it,...nice :smile: , right on brother :cool:

regards
marlon
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top