Exploring Quantum Fields: Defining and Characterizing in 3D

  • Thread starter Duhoc
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Fields
In summary: Bill have clarified that a quantum field is defined by an operator at every point in space, and this operator can be described mathematically using set theory. The concept of points in space is not physical, but mathematical and infinite in number. The points of space have no dimension and can be assigned coordinates, leading to the idea of space being continuous. Euclidean geometry defines a point as having no part, making an infinite amount of points possible.
  • #1
Duhoc
56
0
I read in an article that a quantum field is one where every point in the field is defined by an imaginary number. If you square the imaginary number you get a wave function. But can a three dimensional field be defined by a set of points, finite or infinite? Does it mean a field characterized by an array of points? What kind of an array would characterize a field? How resolved would it have to be?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Duhoc said:
I read in an article that a quantum field is one where every point in the field is defined by an imaginary number.
The article was wrong.

A quantum field is an operator (or set of operators) at every point in space.
 
  • #3
Duhoc said:
I read in an article that a quantum field is one where every point in the field is defined by an imaginary number.

Avodyne is correct. A quantum field is defined by an operator at each point. The meaning of the operator is as per an observable in QM:
http://physics.mq.edu.au/~jcresser/Phys301/Chapters/Chapter13.pdf

Thanks
Bill
 
  • #4
Duhoc said:
I read in an article that a quantum field is...

It's impossible for us to comment sensibly when you don't provide a pointer to the article. Either it's wrong (likely, especially if it's a source that wouldn't be allowed under the PhysicsForums rules), or you've misunderstood it, but we can't tell which.
 
  • #5
Avodyne said:
The article was wrong.

A quantum field is an operator (or set of operators) at every point in space.
Thank you so much for responding. However, I can't get past the statement, "everywhere in space." It makes absolutely no sense, logically or mathematically. You can describe space in all kinds of ways, in many different systems, but you cannot account for a field as just a set of points. I'm sure its just something I can't get my head around, but also, what do they mean by an imaginary number that if squared gives the wave function.
 
  • #6
Duhoc said:
Thank you so much for responding. However, I can't get past the statement, "everywhere in space." It makes absolutely no sense, logically or mathematically. You can describe space in all kinds of ways, in many different systems, but you cannot account for a field as just a set of points.

A field is not a set of points - its something assigned to each point in a set of points.

Mathematically it's a function whose domain are the points of space, and as such can be defined with complete rigour using set theory.

An electric field you almost certainly learned about at school is the most common example.

Did you express similar doubts to your teacher at the time :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p

Just kidding of course - these concepts can be slightly tricky at first - but persevere.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Duhoc said:
I'm sure its just something I can't get my head around, but also, what do they mean by an imaginary number that if squared gives the wave function.

What that is probably referring to is the Born rule:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_rule

What you wrote is incorrect.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • #8
bhobba said:
A field is not a set of points - its something assigned to each point in a set of points.

Mathematically it's a function whose domain are the points of space, and as such can be defined with complete rigour using set theory.

An electric field you almost certainly learned about at school is the most common example.

Did you express similar doubts to your teacher at the time :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p

Just kidding of course - these concepts can be slightly tricky at first - but persevere.

Thanks
Bill
Did you express similar doubts to your teacher at the time :p:p:p:p:p:p:p:p Bill, I shall ignore this rather gratuitous remark. But are the points of space little three dimensional balls? two dimension circles? are there an infinite number of whatever they are? a finite number? can space curve depending on our perspective? is space continuous in all magnitudes i.e. very small magnitudes. Maybe space is limited by a "smallest possible length." A field may be a characterization of space, a mental projection, an idea, a way of understanding space, or orienting ourselves and physical processes. So a physical phenomenon can define space as a spatial relation, and information can be expressed in terms of that spatial relation, but there is no way in this universe or any other that space is composed of an infinite set of points.
 
  • #9
Duhoc said:
But are the points of space little three dimensional balls? two dimension circles? are there an infinite number of whatever they are? a finite number?

I believe a point is, by definition, 0-dimensional. As such there should be an infinite amount of them.

Duhoc said:
So a physical phenomenon can define space as a spatial relation, and information can be expressed in terms of that spatial relation, but there is no way in this universe or any other that space is composed of an infinite set of points.

Points are not physical objects, but mathematical ones. If you take any region of space, you can assign coordinates to any point within that region, and mathematically there will be an infinite number of points available to assign a coordinate to.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #10
Duhoc said:
But are the points of space little three dimensional balls? two dimension circles? are there an infinite number of whatever they are? a finite number? can space curve depending on our perspective? is space continuous in all magnitudes i.e. very small magnitudes. Maybe space is limited by a "smallest possible length." A field may be a characterization of space, a mental projection, an idea, a way of understanding space, or orienting ourselves and physical processes.

Think back to Euclidean geometry - what was the definition of a point?
http://aleph0.clarku.edu/~djoyce/java/elements/bookI/bookI.html
'A point is that which has no part.'

Since it has no part you can always find a point between any two points so there must be an infinite number.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Duhoc said:
but there is no way in this universe or any other that space is composed of an infinite set of points.

Your reason for saying that is?

Physics is a mathematical model. The mathematical model par-excellence is good old Euclidean geometry:
http://poetry.about.com/od/poems/l/blmillayeuclid.htm

Physics in general follows exactly the same paradigm.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Drakkith said:
I believe a point is, by definition, 0-dimensional. As such there should be an infinite amount of them.
Points are not physical objects, but mathematical ones. If you take any region of space, you can assign coordinates to any point within that region, and mathematically there will be an infinite number of points available to assign a coordinate to.
A set with zero elements, or a set with an infinite number of elements of zero magnitude can exist in only one place, and that is the imagination. If you use a mathematical construct that exists in the imagination, as ideas let us say, and that construct proves to have a valid application in the physical world then as reasonable men we can assume a realm of mathematical reality apart from physical reality. So the question I am asking is, in which reality does space reside, the mathematical one or the real one. Let's say you decide to open a pharmacy. You ride through the Bronx, get the lay of the land, see, for example that there are three medical centers on Third Ave and no pharmacies. At this point the pharmacy exists only in your mind, as an idea, like the elements in your set that have no dimensions. To make the pharmacy a reality, you are going to need some energy, or money in this case, and I'm going to have to make a set of decisions based on a lot of things. If I do all that, then something which only existed in my mind has become a physical reality. But in perusing the area, I was gauging spatial relations. The "area" could sustain a pharmacy. Each decision I made crystallized the idea into a reality. And to my way of thinking the same principle applies to space. Space can be an approximation of a field, a very good approximation, but as a physical reality and an approximation it cannot be infinite. And I identify it as a physical reality for two reasons. First it is flat, and secondly it is limited to a smallest possible length. So as physical reality and informational system it is a finite set and limited with respect to the functions that can be applied to it.
 
  • #13
Duhoc said:
I read in an article that a quantum field is one where every point in the field is defined by an imaginary number. If you square the imaginary number you get a wave function. But can a three dimensional field be defined by a set of points, finite or infinite? Does it mean a field characterized by an array of points? What kind of an array would characterize a field? How resolved would it have to be?
Duhoc said:
However, I can't get past the statement, "everywhere in space." It makes absolutely no sense, logically or mathematically.

Avodyne said:
The article was wrong.

A quantum field is an operator (or set of operators) at every point in space.

Hello everyone
Article was wrong - true
Quantum field is an operator (and it is already squared) - no need to square again. To get wave function you had to cube the velocity of particle for example photon - it is finite number. Than quantum field it is not two dimensional field anymore it is three dimensional wave.
In this case it is wrong to say "everywhere in space" - correct is "everywhere in time" according to STR where the mass had a energy in photon field.

http://phys.org/news/2014-12-quantum-physics-complicated.html#jCp Quantum physics just got less complicated
 
  • #14
Duhoc said:
Space can be an approximation of a field, a very good approximation, but as a physical reality and an approximation it cannot be infinite.

Uh, no, you don't know this and you have zero evidence to support your position.

And I identify it as a physical reality for two reasons. First it is flat, and secondly it is limited to a smallest possible length.

General Relativity disagrees with you.

Since it is obvious you are trying to force science to bend to your personal opinion, I am locking this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, goce2014 and bhobba

FAQ: Exploring Quantum Fields: Defining and Characterizing in 3D

What is a field?

A field is a physical quantity that exists at every point in space. Examples of fields include the electric field, magnetic field, and gravitational field. Fields can be described by their magnitude and direction at each point in space.

How are fields measured?

Fields can be measured using specialized instruments such as voltmeters, magnetometers, and accelerometers. These instruments can detect the strength and direction of the field at a specific point in space.

What is the difference between a scalar field and a vector field?

A scalar field has only magnitude, while a vector field has both magnitude and direction. Examples of scalar fields include temperature and pressure, while examples of vector fields include velocity and force.

How are fields created?

Fields are created by the presence of a source, such as an electric charge or a mass. The source creates a disturbance in the surrounding space, resulting in the field. For example, a positive electric charge creates an electric field around it.

What are some real-world applications of fields?

Fields have numerous real-world applications, including telecommunications (electromagnetic fields), navigation (magnetic fields), and medical imaging (magnetic and electric fields). They are also crucial in understanding the behavior of celestial bodies and the universe as a whole.

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
475
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
113
Views
8K
Replies
75
Views
8K
Back
Top