Started by josephpalazzo, June 17, 2014, 08:01:06 AM
Quote from: Solitary on August 07, 2014, 12:49:26 AM Classically, the electron is fundamentally different from a photon. In QM, we see them not that much differently as particles/waves. How is this to be reconciled?There are two possible ways to interpret this: one, you could envision that the particles are fundamental. The photons are particles, and if you pack enough of them, that gives rise to a classical field; two, you could imagine that itâ€™s the field that is fundamental, and when you quantize it, itâ€™s the ripples that give rise to particles. What happens when you do quantum mechanics to such a field? Remarkably, it turns into a collection of particles. That is, we can express the quantum state of the field as a superposition of different possibilities: no particles, one particle (with certain momentum), two particles, etc. (The collection of all these possibilities is known as â€œFock space.â€) Itâ€™s much like an electron orbiting an atomic nucleus, which classically could be anywhere, but in quantum mechanics takes on certain discrete energy levels. Classically the field has a value everywhere, but quantum-mechanically the field can be thought of as a way of keeping track an arbitrary collection of particles, including their appearance and disappearance and interaction. My brain hurts! Solitary
Quotefields are the fundamental objects.
Quote from: Solitary on August 07, 2014, 01:11:42 PM Isn't this what I posted? Aren't the fundamental objects composed of particles? If something is composed of something else, does that not make it the central importance or basic necessity? Does a field exist without particles? Does a field exist if particles are not moving? Solitary