Timeline for Why do we observe particles, not quantum fields?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2024 at 7:02 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
edited tags; edited tags
|
|
| Feb 20, 2024 at 5:01 | history | edited | Charles Hudgins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Oct 7, 2022 at 21:28 | comment | added | Mahir Lokvancic | Re "can't a quantum field be a superposition of states with different particle content...:" Actually, it already is, but it is only the interaction among systems (fields) that manifests itself thru quanta. Again, why the interactions are mediated via quanta (at least "hard" interactions) is basically an axiom of nature, to the best of my understanding of these matters. This is rather similar to the measurement problem in quantum mechanics -- it is simply a postulate (despite some claims from decoherence theories, etc, to the contrary). | |
| Oct 7, 2022 at 21:28 | comment | added | Mahir Lokvancic | Re "why do we seem to always observe states with definite particle content:" I doubt this can be answered (reduced to other basic phenomena); it simply is so, something that we observe the way nature works. It could be because "continuous-exchange-of energy/momenta" universe could be unstable (as already indicated by original Planck's insight). Given this backdrop, we developed mathematical tools and structures that seem to incorporate the concept of quanta remarkably well and faithfully, so much so that you can essentially read nature from mathematics. | |
| Oct 7, 2022 at 1:53 | comment | added | Charles Hudgins | @MahirLokvancic Both. My question boils down to: why do we seem to always observe states with definite particle content? Even when we aren't directly making observations, it seems that low energy macroscopic interactions happen as though there is definite particle content. In general, can't a quantum field be a superposition of states with different particle content? Why don't we see that playing out in low energy phenomena? Or, said differently, why isn't it a problem that we barely ever consider states with particle number superposition when describing phenomena? | |
| Oct 6, 2022 at 10:16 | comment | added | Mahir Lokvancic | Are you phrasing the question in the context of virtual particles or real particles? (My impression about QFT is that it is the former with the implicit interpretation, whereas the latter has a straightforward interpretation with experiment; specific coefficients in the QFT equations correspond to elements of reality that we perceive as quanta.) | |
| Oct 5, 2022 at 1:07 | comment | added | DanielSank | In some sense, "particle" means "the thing you can observe about a quantum field". | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 21:05 | answer | added | Dexter Kim | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 4, 2022 at 18:36 | comment | added | michael nettleton | Not all particles are observable in the conventional sense; indeed most are identified by their effects such as gravitational ones. | |
| Oct 2, 2022 at 21:47 | answer | added | John Doty | timeline score: 2 | |
| S Oct 2, 2022 at 21:02 | history | mod moved comments to chat | |||
| S Oct 2, 2022 at 21:02 | comment | added | Buzz♦ | Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. | |
| Oct 1, 2022 at 11:39 | history | edited | Charles Hudgins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 41 characters in body
|
| Sep 30, 2022 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1575772466156371968 | ||
| Sep 30, 2022 at 8:07 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Sep 30, 2022 at 5:24 | answer | added | FlatterMann | timeline score: 29 | |
| Sep 30, 2022 at 4:57 | answer | added | anna v | timeline score: 17 | |
| Sep 30, 2022 at 3:50 | answer | added | niels nielsen | timeline score: 8 | |
| Sep 30, 2022 at 0:07 | history | asked | Charles Hudgins | CC BY-SA 4.0 |