I have an undergraduate minor in astrophysics from a long time ago and have been brushing up to teach my kids, so I'm not an expert or even a great student of these things, but something I thought I'd log in and ask here:(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

If special relativity stands for the premise that there is no preferred frame of reference under constant velocity, but QM tells us that (1) we're not "really" anywhere, we're just probably at a certain 3-space coordinate, and (2) there is a nonzero chance that at any given instant I (or a particle of me?) could undergo what would amount to extreme (but perhaps not continuous?) acceleration and show up somewhere else entirely I would ask:

(a) Are there *any* frames of reference at all?

(b) Are there any frames of reference where constant velocity isn't just a high probability?

(c) Inasmuch as GR solves the problems for different accelerations,

(c1) how can QFT work without GR and

(c2) how can QFT work *with* SR?

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

Join Physics Forums Today!

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

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

# Tunnelling and special relativity

Loading...

Similar Threads - Tunnelling special relativity | Date |
---|---|

I Wrong wavefunction speed? | Jan 10, 2018 |

A Tunneling Electron Energies | Jan 4, 2018 |

I Source of energy for quantum tunneling of a particle | Dec 19, 2017 |

I Concepts to understand Quantum Tunneling | Dec 5, 2017 |

I Energy of an electron with Schrodinger's equation | Dec 4, 2017 |

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