944 reputation
11340
bio website axiomsofchoice.org
location
age
visits member for 3 years, 3 months
seen 5 hours ago

A duck walks into a bar. Animal control is promptly called and the duck is released into a near by park.

My email is to be found on my website.


Jun
5
comment Is quantum gravity, ignoring geometry, the theory of a fictitious force?
@JohnRennie: "Dear President Nixon: Your tenure has witnessed the rise of the VHS tape and string theory as a promising avenue to quantum gravity. Which one do you think will be persued longer?" :)
May
28
comment The path integral and Feynman diagrams
I think there is a history of science SE site now, where this seems to fit. Then again, I don't know who frequents this boards. To get to the question, since you ask how Feynman came to his conclusions, the answer surely lies in his knowledge and for this it's crucial to have a look what he worked on before: wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler-Feynman absorber theory.
May
21
awarded  Notable Question
May
21
revised Apparent dimensional mismatch after taking derivative
\left \right
May
21
suggested approved edit on Apparent dimensional mismatch after taking derivative
May
16
comment Double slit experiment and single particles. Is the wave function just a mathematical model?
I personally think that postulating a reality beyond the personal conscious 90 year lasting perception in this world is just humans seeking for stability - the concept is simple and convenient for some thoughts but often with little merit. I'm not good at discussing solutions which are consistent with that framework, but I'd also rather try to phrase the question directly with what you write in the third paragraph: "Will one single photon produce the interference pattern? Does it take many photons to build up the interference pattern?" (Unless the question has been asked before.)
May
16
comment Double slit experiment and single particles. Is the wave function just a mathematical model?
What would you say is an example for a concept within a physical theory which is more than token of a mathematical model?
May
6
comment Is the quantization of the harmonic oscillator unique?
Confirmed by some experiment for some application. One could imagine that the theory arising from a different quantization has other applications. Also that studying other quantization of the system leads to ideas for quantization of other systems. Or the new version might have some observables equal, but is overall more suitable for certain computations. Apart from these points, it's an interesting mathematical question.
Apr
21
awarded  Fanatic
Apr
14
comment Does anyone take the Wightman axioms seriously?
"The question sounds like this, for a classical physicist: Does anyone...". That should read: The question sounds (to an here not further specified referent, probably you mean yourself) like the following question sounds like to a classical physicist: Does anyone..."
Apr
13
revised Lie algebra and Lie group about quantum harmonic oscillator
he lied to us.
Apr
13
suggested approved edit on Lie algebra and Lie group about quantum harmonic oscillator
Apr
13
awarded  Enlightened
Apr
13
awarded  Nice Answer
Apr
10
comment Is $\langle k \vert k_1k_2\rangle=0$
Have you tried writing down the bracket with the annihilation/procreation operators in full, and permuted them inside the vacuum state according to the commutator rule?
Apr
9
comment Feynman propagators for scalar fields
Off-topic remark: I'd add $\left|_{J_1=0}\right.$ right after the operator. Btw. to force a good height of |, that reads "\left|_{J_1=0}\right."
Apr
4
comment Where do $L_+$ and $L_-$ live, if not in $\mathfrak{so(3)}$?
@user35952: My points is, e.g., if you study the multiplication of the number $7$ by the number $5$ in $\mathbb N$, there is no reason to write this as $7\mapsto(1-2i)\,7\,\overline{(1-2i)}$, if you think that's useful.
Apr
4
comment Where do $L_+$ and $L_-$ live, if not in $\mathfrak{so(3)}$?
I might be misunderstanding something here, so let me raise a point: Without judging if the operators do or do not lie in the algebra, why does your question arise anyway? In my ear, it sounds similar to "I want to study the properties of consecutive derivatives and people use abstract algebra to do it. How is that justified?" Why not? If you study how $a\mapsto\mathrm{e}^{i\phi}a$ affects elements of $\mathbb C$, is there a reason you would you restrict your study by demanding not to use complex conjugation on $\mathbb C$?
Apr
2
comment What are the spaces over spacetime points in which a field takes its values? Is it always the same?
What is the b-boundary approach? What objects are added to the frame bundle? And at those new fibers the direct sum of frame bundle and that new object then?
Apr
1
revised Does QED provide a closed form for Coulomb logarithms?
added 59 characters in body