Quantum principle of relativity.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

Some interesting mathematical results if it’s assumed some objects can travel faster than light. Observations from quantum physics seem to be deduced.

https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/ab76f7

Quantum mechanics is an incredibly successful theory and yet the statistical nature of its predictions is hard to accept and has been the subject of numerous debates. The notion of inherent randomness, something that happens without any cause, goes against our rational understanding of reality. To add to the puzzle, randomness that appears in non-relativistic quantum theory tacitly respects relativity, for example, it makes instantaneous signaling impossible. Here, we argue that this is because the special theory of relativity can itself account for such a random behavior. We show that the full mathematical structure of the Lorentz transformation, the one which includes the superluminal part, implies the emergence of non-deterministic dynamics, together with complex probability amplitudes and multiple trajectories. This indicates that the connections between the two seemingly different theories are deeper and more subtle than previously thought.

[jimlup]

1. What worries me is that 30 years ago I would have been able to read and understand the actual paper

Now, having been away from the field for a long while it is quite fuzzy like trying to look at something kinda' out of focus.

It is interesting though. I'll see how much I can get through. I get the Lorentz Transformations and show them to my students but I have not worked on field theory itself for too long.

[Igel]

2. Same here.

Makes me not want to try to read it. Easier to say to myself I'd certainly understand it, why bother? Instead I'll probably shoot my ego in the foot and attack it after breakfast. (Perhaps after breakfast in 9 months or 5 years, but certainly after breakfast.)

Might wind up teaching AP Physics C in the fall, and it's been so long since I've done even calculus-based freshman physics that I'm thinking maybe a refresher this summer is in order. It's one thing to follow the bouncing ball through somebody else's work, it's another to actually teach. Even something a lot simpler. (It would help if they could decide between mechanics and electricity/magnetism before August, but nah, that would make life easy.)

[jimlup]

3. Physics Teachers Unite!

I am currently teaching AP Physics C. It is my favorite course. I have the strongest students and it helps me further my own understanding. It also helps keep me in practice.

I am using Haliday and Resnick, not because it is the best text, but mostly for historical reasons.

I did some reading and was able to follow the basic discussion of their derivation of the Lorentz Transformation. I didn't check the algebra but could if I decided to. To my surprise, I followed the initial discussion of superluminal velocities and their example of the Swartzchild metric for a Black Hole. I was fortunate to have pursued some of that in graduate school so at least I have a foundation to work from there.

Cheers!