# David Corfield quantum physics

…compared to this discovery that Newton’s laws of motion were quite wrong in atoms, the theory of relativity was only a minor modification. (Feynman, QED, p. 5)

Or is it that space needed a radical rethinking first for quantum gauge field theory? Does QM as $0+1$d QFT mean that we need the latter’s new space to understand it properly? What would a prequantum version look like?

Perhaps relevant here is Dyson’s divorce between mathematics and physics. Reconciliation comes through geometry - principle/fibre bundles.

Seems like Heisenberg is pointing to a mathematical theory playing a constitutive role:

Instead of asking: How can one in the known mathematical scheme express a given experimental situation? the other question was put: Is it true, perhaps, that only such experimental situations can arise in nature as can be expressed in the mathematical formalism? (Heisenberg, Physics and Philosophy, 1958, p. 43)

[I]n the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory we can indeed proceed without mentioning ourselves as individuals, but we cannot disregard the fact that natural science is formed by men. Natural science does not simply describe and explain nature; it is part of the interplay between nature and ourselves; it describes nature as exposed to our nature of questioning. (p. 75)

### In linear HoTT

What would a piece of quantum physics reasoning look like in linear HoTT? (Has this resolved the logical theorem prover/computer algebra divide?)

What would a demonstration of energy levels in a square potential well look like?

### Quantum cosmology

Hartle suggests (The Impact of Cosmology on Quantum Mechanics) four ways that the Copenhagen view of QM is problematised by cosmology.

Alternatives to quantum theory would be of great interest if only to guide experiment. Given the trend in the development of fundamental theory, it is very possible that the disparity between human language and the language of fundamental physics will increase as quantum theory is replaced or extended. If that is the case, careful analyses of the relationship between human language and the language of physics of the kind sketched all too superficially in this essay will be increasingly important for clarity of understanding. (quant-ph/0610131, p. 11)

Last revised on January 11, 2020 at 03:32:50. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.