Stephen Weinberg on Understanding Quantum Mechanics

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Stephen Weinberg's analysis of quantum mechanics critiques the Copenhagen interpretation, asserting that both observers and measurement apparatus must adhere to quantum mechanical rules. He emphasizes the deterministic nature of the wavefunction's evolution as described by the Schrödinger equation, while acknowledging the probabilistic outcomes that arise from this framework. The discussion highlights the inadequacies of various interpretations, including the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) and decoherent histories, suggesting that no current interpretation satisfactorily resolves the foundational issues of quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Schrödinger equation in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with the Copenhagen interpretation and its criticisms
  • Knowledge of decoherence and its role in quantum measurement
  • Awareness of various interpretations of quantum mechanics, including MWI and decoherent histories
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Born rule in quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of decoherence on quantum measurement
  • Investigate the Many Worlds Interpretation and its critiques
  • Read Weinberg's "Lectures on Quantum Mechanics" for a deeper mathematical understanding
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics students, and researchers interested in the philosophical implications of quantum interpretations and the foundational issues in quantum theory.

  • #151
Ah, I see. However, the path-integral formalism is also no new theory or even interpretation. It's QT (including both non-relativistic "1st quantization" and relativistic QFT) but offers alternative analytical methodology to evaluate things. It's for sure, together with the invention of Feynman diagrams, among Feynman's most significant contributions to the methodology of theoretical physics.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
vanhees71 said:
Ah, I see. However, the path-integral formalism is also no new theory or even interpretation.

The formalism isn't an interpretation - just the math expressed a different way.

However when people say its taking all possible paths at once it is an interpretation - the path is a hidden variable. Its very novel because the idea of actually taking every possible path at once is, how to put it it, rather unusual.

That said I am not terribly fussed about it - its just semantics which isn't really that important - its the math that is.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • #153
What you indeed do in the path integral is to evaluate probability amplitudes in a specific way, i.e., by integrating over all possible trajectories in phase space, leading to the propagator.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
954
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K