What is the role of the path-integral formulation in quantum mechanics?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the role of the path-integral formulation in quantum mechanics, particularly in relation to interpretations of quantum theory, the concept of multiple histories, and the implications of these interpretations on our understanding of the universe. Participants explore various interpretations, including those proposed by Thomas Hertog and Richard Feynman, and their acceptance within the scientific community.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Thomas Hertog's assertion about quantum mechanics implying many histories is an interpretation rather than an established fact.
  • There is a discussion about the path-integral formulation proposed by Richard Feynman, with some participants questioning its validity in explaining quantum phenomena like particles being in multiple places at once.
  • One participant mentions that collapse interpretations of quantum mechanics suggest a single history, contrasting with the many histories interpretation.
  • Hidden variable theories are also referenced as supporting a single history, leading to further questioning of Hertog's views as merely interpretative.
  • Another participant argues that the path-integral formulation is a mathematically less defined but physically equivalent method to describe quantum theory, emphasizing that it does not imply particles exist in multiple locations simultaneously.
  • Concerns are raised about the many-worlds interpretation, with one participant suggesting it does not resolve the fundamental issues some have with quantum theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of quantum mechanics and the implications of the path-integral formulation. There is no consensus on whether Hertog's interpretation is widely accepted or merely his opinion.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on interpretations and the limitations of various models in quantum mechanics, indicating that the discussion involves unresolved philosophical and theoretical questions.

I2004
Messages
57
Reaction score
0
Thomas Hertog a colleague of Hawking has stated that quantum mechanics implys the universe has many histories. Is this an agreed fact or just his opinon/interpretation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
he also states:

This summation of all paths, proposed in the 1960s by physicist Richard Feynman and others, is the only way to explain some of the bizarre properties of quantum particles, such as their apparent ability to be in two places at once. The key point is that not all paths contribute equally to the photon's behaviour: the straight-line trajectory dominates over the indirect ones.

IS THIS TRUE?
 
all I am after is a simple answer, does quantum mechanics forbid a single history universe?

please someone help...
 
Quantum mechanics implies different things to different people. In collapse interpretations there is just 1 single history. The key word is 'imply' which is different from 'is'.
 
and hidden variables also say there is one history along with a number of interpretation?

So hertog is just quoting his opinon of interpretation rather than accepted fact?
 
I2004 said:
and hidden variables also say there is one history along with a number of interpretation?

So hertog is just quoting his opinon of interpretation rather than accepted fact?
Yes, and yes.
 
Even the sum of all histories interpretation agrees that there is only one history. Its just that its the sum of all possible ones...
 
I2004 said:
Thomas Hertog a colleague of Hawking has stated that quantum mechanics implys the universe has many histories. Is this an agreed fact or just his opinon/interpretation?

Interpretation. The agreed part is that this is an acceptable interpretation, but not the only one. If you look at a closed system, you will realize that entropy is at a local minimum at that point. Going to the past or the future, there are many histories which are possible which will be consistent with the observed system. You could say that entropy and histories are essentially a measure of the same thing.
 
This summation of all paths, proposed in the 1960s by physicist Richard Feynman and others, is the only way to explain some of the bizarre properties of quantum particles, such as their apparent ability to be in two places at once. The key point is that not all paths contribute equally to the photon's behaviour: the straight-line trajectory dominates over the indirect ones.

so this is just his opinon too I take it?
 
  • #10
This is of course nonsense. The path-integral formulation is a (mathematically less well defined) but physically equivalent (whenever one can make sense of it and calculate things with it) way to describe standard quantum theory of Heisenberg, Born, Dirac et al (1926). Often it's a nice tool to express things more elegantly than in the way with Hilbert-space objects (vectors, Statistical Operators, observables, etc.), e.g., the quantization of gauge theories and other functional methods in QFT, some aspects of scattering theory (asymptotic limits etc), and also the (semi-)classical approximation.

However, no matter in which way you express quantum theory mathematically, in quantum theory a particle is not at several places at once but there is a probability distribution for its position depending on the state it is in. The many-worlds "interpretation" is nice to think about in science-fiction story like ways but it doesn't solve anything to the problems some people still have with accepting quantum theory as the way nature works on the most fundamental level because it partially contradicts our "common sense", which however is "trained" by everyday experience with macroscopic objects (i.e., many-body systems with a huge number of microscopic constituents and electromagnetic fields), which behave according to classical physics, because that's the case for the rough "coarse grained" description which is sufficient to understand their behavior. All this can be explained with appropriate approximations for the dynamics of collective (macroscopic) observables of quantum theory, no matter whether you use the path-integral formalism or not.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K