3 ms·

We may be getting into semantics but QFT doesn't say electrons are even moving. It says there are no particles at all anywhere period full stop UNTIL the precis

We may be getting into semantics but QFT doesn't say electrons are even moving. It says there are no particles at all anywhere period full stop UNTIL the precise moment of measurement. This is the "Measurement Problem". The measurement CREATES the particle. The famous Bell experiment proved that the view of quantum mechanics as describing how particles "move" is incorrect, because the probability wave is not actually describing any movements of any actual particles. If you think of a single Hydrogen atom floating in space, no there is not an electron moving around it. There is no electron that exists at all "until" something interacts (according to Standard Model) with the wave function and causes the wave to collapse and "choose" a place in spacetime to materialize an "electron" in and only then is there an electron.

tsimionescu 6y ago
The hydrogen atom has a wave function which shows properties for a negative charge and mass with some amplitudes at different positions in space and time, and a positive charge and mass at certain other positions. Now, before you perform a measurement, you can't say that the electron is anywhere particularly in space, and netither can you say that about the proton. In fact, the atom itself isn't really somewhere definite. On the other hand, just because they don't exist somewhere specific that doesn't mean that they don't exist. That charge and mass can't just disappear, so if we ever observed the atom, we know that it still exists in some sense. Even with QFT, you may dispute whether the particle exists or not, but its conserved properties certainly do, regardless of how non-localized they may be. And again, this is just an interpretation of QM that were discussing. Adherents of MWI would say that the particles are perfectly real, perfectly localized (in a particular world) and move essentially like classical particles, but they happen to interact with all different versions of themselves in all the different worlds, as long as they keep the same phase. I personally don't like MWI, but it is still consistent with all observations.
- WClayFerguson 6y ago
  well said.

tsimionescu 6y ago

The hydrogen atom has a wave function which shows properties for a negative charge and mass with some amplitudes at different positions in space and time, and a positive charge and mass at certain other positions. Now, before you perform a measurement, you can't say that the electron is anywhere particularly in space, and netither can you say that about the proton. In fact, the atom itself isn't really somewhere definite. On the other hand, just because they don't exist somewhere specific that doesn't mean that they don't exist. That charge and mass can't just disappear, so if we ever observed the atom, we know that it still exists in some sense. Even with QFT, you may dispute whether the particle exists or not, but its conserved properties certainly do, regardless of how non-localized they may be. And again, this is just an interpretation of QM that were discussing. Adherents of MWI would say that the particles are perfectly real, perfectly localized (in a particular world) and move essentially like classical particles, but they happen to interact with all different versions of themselves in all the different worlds, as long as they keep the same phase. I personally don't like MWI, but it is still consistent with all observations.

WClayFerguson 6y ago
well said.