3 ms·
>Personally, I think adding in the time component will be essential to completing this puzzle but all in all it makes for an avenue of investigation which is in
by Enginerrrd 5y ago
>Personally, I think adding in the time component will be essential to completing this puzzle but all in all it makes for an avenue of investigation which is interesting.
Not a physicist, but I've often wondered if the basis of QFT got off on the wrong foot by making time a privileged coordinate instead of a quantum operator like it does for position.
- goldenkey 5y agoYou just get into a twist of not being able to renormalize if you create a dependency chain like that. The same reason quantum gravity is such a problem - gravitons emit gravitons..
- codethief 5y agoWhile I sympathize with your unease about making time a privileged coordinate, even in conventional quantum mechanics an operator for time seems difficult. What would that operator measure? The time at which a given object "is"? The whole point of physics is to describe the dynamic nature of reality, parametrized by time. Speaking of which, time(-of-arrival) measurements in quantum mechanics have recently attracted quite some interest: The classic Copenhagen formalism doesn't seem to give an answer here (or at least not a unique one – it depends on how you perform the calculation). Meanwhile, Bohmian mechanics does seem to make a precise prediction. It will be interesting to see what experiments will yield.