The most fundamental principle in physics is called 'The Principle of Least Action'. It also happens to be a good principle to live by during these trying times
-
-
Replying to @InertialObservr
I always found this principle a bit "strange". Is it about physics or about math? It looks to me like a funny way to write equations in, say, another form, very useful, but I am not sure about its "fundamentality" from the physics point of view.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @rayohauno
i would argue that there's no more fundamental principle. it's one of those things that has remained true from classical mechanics all the way down to quantum field theory
5 replies 3 retweets 27 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @rayohauno
You can derive the PoLA from Feynman path integrals. This would suggest to me that it, or at least quantum interference, is more fundamental.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LucasVB @rayohauno
how do you get the path integral without writing down the Lagrangian? We also no that the Euler Lagrange equations are not in general satisfied after quantum corrections
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @rayohauno
Writing the Lagrangian for your system gets you the action. It's already something you do before you attempt to minimize it. The point is that you don't have to minimize it, you can just sum over all histories, and the interfernece reproduce the classical least action principle.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @LucasVB @rayohauno
ahh i'm remembering this now .. that's fascinating and would indeed be more fundamental in my book .. 'interference' though i'm not sure i would call quantum interference .. iirc isn't it just that when h->0 you can use steepest descent cause of the ever more rapid oscillations?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @InertialObservr @rayohauno
You don't need h->0 at all to use it. You can even derive the uncertainty principle from the final probability distribution for multiple final outcomes for a finite h. When h->0, you simply get, exactly, the path of least-action as a Dirac delta distribution over outcomes.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
that's awesome .. what's a good toy QM system for me to work this out in?
-
-
Replying to @InertialObservr @rayohauno
Try it with a double slit and a few of the important paths. You can show all of this pretty easily. I've also worked on a simulation of this for that Quantum Mechanics for Everyone course I got pinned: https://1ucasvb.com/gumooc/qed/20_DoubleSlit.html …
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.