The discussion centers on the implications of nonlocal hidden variable theories in the context of relativistic quantum mechanics. Participants explore various papers that address the feasibility and consequences of such theories, particularly focusing on causality, the definition of time, and the treatment of spacetime in quantum mechanics.
Participants express differing views on the implications of causality violations, the treatment of time in relativity, and the validity of various theoretical approaches. No consensus is reached on these issues, and multiple competing perspectives remain throughout the discussion.
Participants highlight limitations in the definitions and assumptions used in the discussed theories, particularly regarding the treatment of time and causality. There are unresolved questions about the mathematical models corresponding to the discussed figures and the implications of these models for initial/boundary value problems.
One way to fix this factor is indeed to fix the parametrization. But the point is that it is not the only way.A. Neumaier said:But (for a curve) this tangent vector is unique only up to a (positive or negative) factor.
So how do you fix it without getting a spurious sign in your ds?Demystifier said:One way to fix this factor is indeed to fix the parametrization. But the point is that it is not the only way.
If the curve is oriented (which is a much weaker requirement than that it is parameterized), then the sign is chosen such that ##s## increases in the direction of orientation. In my case, the orientation at each point is defined by the direction of the vector ##V^{\mu}##, to which the curve is tangent. Note also that in my paper ##\Omega## in Eq. (111) is positive.A. Neumaier said:So how do you fix it without getting a spurious sign in your ds?