QFT Course: Electric & Magnetic Fields, but No Fields for Electrons?

deadringer
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I'm studying a QFT course, and we've been asked to consider why classical physicists found it useful to introduce electric and magnetic fields, but not fields for electrons or other particles. I'm completely stumped, and would appreciate any hints. thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The wave length of visible light is thousands of Angstroms so the wave propagation of photons was easily seen. Wave lengths of massive particles is much shorter, so their wave propagation was not noticed for a long time. Also, photons are bosons so macroscopic fields due to ~10^20 photons existed. Fermions cannot produce macroscopic field strengths.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top