I The Power of QM and QFT

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter bhobba
  • Start date Start date
Messages
10,941
Reaction score
3,814
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following;
https://www.cambridge.org/engage/ap...maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf

'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s Equations (and therefore all of ElectroMagnetism).'


Thanks
Bill
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well you have two options Quantum vs Classical. Now infinities are all over physics (classical and quantum), the self energy of an electron is known to diverge to infinity.

So from a classical logic stand it's obvious you can infer CFT (Classical Field Theories) from QFT, from logical contradiction you can infer whatever you like.... a dead and alive cats and kets that wear bras.
:oldbiggrin: (sorry, that's my sense of humour, not everyone get it).
 
bhobba said:
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following;
https://www.cambridge.org/engage/ap...maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf

'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s Equations (and therefore all of ElectroMagnetism).'


Thanks
Bill
Isn’t that how we justify the whole Standard Model Lagrangian? What’s new here?
 
mad mathematician said:
a dead and alive cats and kets that wear bras.
:oldbiggrin: (sorry, that's my sense of humour, not everyone get it).

I get it.

Thanks
Bill
 
pines-demon said:
What’s new here?

Nothing,

I's for those that do not know about it, especially at the I level here or those in later undergraduate years.

Thanks
Bill
 
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
60
Views
7K
Replies
67
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Back
Top