3 ms·
Weirdly it's not related to regular space-time that we seem to inhabit - the Hilbert space in which QM happens does not correspond to the space of special relat
by lanstin 2y ago
Weirdly it's not related to regular space-time that we seem to inhabit - the Hilbert space in which QM happens does not correspond to the space of special relativity. Space and time of specific things are both the result of applying operators to the Hilbert space. The Hilbert space completeness means you have nice properties as far as orthonormal bases and that sort of thing (venturing outside my knowledge of QM here). The dimensionality of the Hilbert space is related to how many distinct quantum states can exist; it is unknown to physics if the universe has a finite dimensional Hilbert space or infinite. Since starting this conversation, I have tried to find any example of a quantum theory based on something other than the mathematics of the continuum without luck (but I'm not well positioned to find such a thing, as I would guess it would come from some constructivist mathematics thing but even regular ZFC QFT isn't formalized yet).
- lisper 2y agoI'm at the hairy edges of my understanding here as well, but AFAIK infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces arise when modeling position-momentum states because it is assumed that space is continuous.
- btilly 2y agoWell, distributions like the Dirac delta qualify. But they can also be viewed as approximations of a continuum. Outside of that, maybe if you look somewhere like string theory? Still, in general, the continuum is enough. And while it takes work, I'm pretty sure that nothing relevant to physics about the continuum cannot be said within a strictly Constructivist version of the continuum. So no, there is no physical theory from which we can justify the existence of more reals than rationals. The justification must be philosophical. And the answers that we accept will strongly depend on what our notions about what existence should mean.