Let me start with a short disclaimer - I am not saying that QM is wrong or things like that. And I very well understand that my argument is not physical, more philosophical one, which may be considered as inappropriate here. Still, my intentions are good and I hope for some understanding.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

When a wave function of a single particle is considered in QM it is somehow analogous to a classical field, i.e. it defines a particular value (complex amplitude) for each point in the 3-dimensional physical space. This looks quite "natural" - it looks natural that for each point in the space a value may be defined.

Things get less natural when a multiple particle wave function is considered in QM - for N particles we would need a 3*N-dimensional space in which for each point a particular amplitude is defined.

Now, I fail to understand, what "real" thing may stay behind such a "big" object. Where and how these amplitudes may be "stored"? (I am a software engineer, so let me think in these terms) Again, for single particle it is very intuitive that each amplitude may be "stored" in a point of our 3-dimensional space but where would the Nature store the amplitudes of 3*N-dimensional space? Looks like too much information to be stored in our world.

I know nothing about QFT, but as far as I could understand, there the amplitude is defined per each "classical" field configuration, which hardly helps to resolve the problem, rather making it worse. So, my uneducated guess is that QFT does not resolve this particular problem, providing more "natural" objects than QM with its multyparticle wavefunction.

If my argument is somehow correct, are there any attempts to resolve this problem? If not correct - I would be much interested to understand why the wave function of multiple particles may be considered as a "natural" object.

PS: of course, my intuition about what is "natural" and what is not may be completely wrong. Still, a function defined on each point of 3*N-dimensional space looks quite "unnatural", too "big" to fit anywhere.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# I Too much info for multiparticle wave function?

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads - much info multiparticle | Date |
---|---|

B So the holographic principle doesn't have much evidence? | Mar 8, 2016 |

Why do we need Quantum Mechanics so much? | Feb 24, 2016 |

Quantum locking -- Good sources of info? | Aug 16, 2015 |

How much time do you have to make the same measurement? | Mar 4, 2015 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**