What Do Feynman Diagrams Reveal About Time Reversibility?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Trip2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Feynman
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the interpretation and implications of Feynman diagrams, particularly in relation to the concept of time reversibility and the behavior of antiparticles. Participants explore the mathematical and conceptual significance of these diagrams within the context of particle physics and field theory.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Feynman diagrams serve as representations of subatomic processes, particularly involving antiparticles that can be mathematically described as moving backward in time.
  • Others argue that these diagrams are more general tools used in various areas of physics, including many-body problems in solid state physics, and are not limited to illustrating particle interactions.
  • A participant questions whether anything physically goes back in time or if it is purely a mathematical construct, referencing the terminology found in external sources.
  • Some contributions highlight that extra loops in Feynman diagrams account for virtual particles and that an infinite number of diagrams may be needed to accurately calculate probabilities, with corrections diminishing as complexity increases.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the notion of antiparticles going back in time, citing concerns about potential violations of causality.
  • Another participant notes that Feynman diagrams can be viewed as mnemonic devices for physicists, where each element corresponds to mathematical terms and interactions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on whether Feynman diagrams imply physical time reversibility or if they are strictly mathematical representations. Disagreement exists regarding the implications of antiparticles and the nature of causality in this context.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reflects various interpretations of Feynman diagrams, with limitations in assumptions about their physical implications and the mathematical frameworks involved. The relationship between diagrams and physical reality remains a point of contention.

Trip2
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
what does Feynman's diagram prove? i know it deals with something "going back in time"
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It doesn't "prove" anything exactly. It's a depiction. Asking what it proves is like asking what Raphael's "Transfiguration of Christ" proves. But the idea is that they are a representation of subatomic processes. In some of these processes, a particular kind of particle known as "antiparticles" are created. These antiparticles have a few strange properties- if they ever meet their "normal" matter counterpart, they annihilate each other- both particles cease to exist, and energy is given off (as light/heat/gamma-ray radiation etc.). In the mathematical description of these particles, you take the description of a "normal" particle and replace the variable describing how they behave with time with its own negative (amongst a couple of other changes). So wheras a normal particle experiences t seconds, an antiparticle experiences -t -as if it's gone backwards in time.
 
o ok i kind of see where your getting at.so in reality there is no particle or anti-particle going back in time?
 
muppet said:
But the idea is that they are a representation of subatomic processes.

Actually, they are much more general than that. Diagrams are also used in e.g. many-body problems in solid state physics. They are basically a very general tool used in field theory that can be used to perform certain calculations (if I remember correctly each diagram represents a term in an expansion of the S-matrix), i.e. they are not only used to illustrate various processes; the extra "loops" etc seen in more complicated diagrams do actually have a specfic meaning.
 
f95toli said:
Actually, they are much more general than that. Diagrams are also used in e.g. many-body problems in solid state physics. They are basically a very general tool used in field theory that can be used to perform certain calculations (if I remember correctly each diagram represents a term in an expansion of the S-matrix), i.e. they are not only used to illustrate various processes; the extra "loops" etc seen in more complicated diagrams do actually have a specfic meaning.

so what in reality "goes back in time" or does it just mathematicly go back in time? because on wiki i looked up feynman diagram and saw the word "go back in time" and assumed something is going back in time.
 
f95toli said:
Actually, they are much more general than that. Diagrams are also used in e.g. many-body problems in solid state physics. They are basically a very general tool used in field theory that can be used to perform certain calculations (if I remember correctly each diagram represents a term in an expansion of the S-matrix), i.e. they are not only used to illustrate various processes; the extra "loops" etc seen in more complicated diagrams do actually have a specfic meaning.

As I understand it, the extra loops are allowing for possibilities such as events relating to virtual particles? I seem to remember reading that to accurately determine the probability of a particular process you'd have to draw infinitely many Feynman diagrams, but that the correction associated with each diagram grew smaller and smaller as the number of vertices increased ...

I think that most particle theorists would say that anti-particles actually go back in time- they do, after all, work on the assumption that their maths describes reality! Obviously, as we can't go back in time, you could never "see" an anti-particle going backwards in time; its creation and annhiliation would always be stored in our memories the same way every other kind of event we see is.
There's a separate thread for particle physics: perhaps if an admin moved this you might find people more knowledgeable about the subject there?
 
muppet said:
As I understand it, the extra loops are allowing for possibilities such as events relating to virtual particles? I seem to remember reading that to accurately determine the probability of a particular process you'd have to draw infinitely many Feynman diagrams, but that the correction associated with each diagram grew smaller and smaller as the number of vertices increased ...

I think that most particle theorists would say that anti-particles actually go back in time- they do, after all, work on the assumption that their maths describes reality! Obviously, as we can't go back in time, you could never "see" an anti-particle going backwards in time; its creation and annhiliation would always be stored in our memories the same way every other kind of event we see is.
There's a separate thread for particle physics: perhaps if an admin moved this you might find people more knowledgeable about the subject there?

i don't think it right because causality violation's would occur.
 
When you do the expansion (1+x)n, you get the binomial coefficients, which have a combinatorial meaning - so you could actually draw corresponding "binomial diagrams". In this case, doing the algebra is usually easier than drawing the diagrams.

Feynman diagrams are just another series expansion, whose coefficients likewise have a combinatorial meaning (combinations of spacetime interactions). In this case, it happens that it's easier to draw the diagrams before doing the algebra.
 
Last edited:
Understand that these diagrams are essentially a mneumonic for physicists. Each line represents a mathematical term, each vertex or wiggly line another term and so forth. They're a pictorial way of putting together a mathematical expression in a comprehensive way.

For any physical process there are infinitely many feynman diagrams that contribute to the actual physical result, but for calculational purposes its useful to only keep say the first few diagrams (b/c typically, but not always, the subsequent diagrams tend to be suppressed or small relative ot the first few).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K