Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is the classical limit “singular”?Jer Steeger & Benjamin H. Feintzeig - 2021 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 88 (C):263-279.
    We argue against claims that the classical ℏ → 0 limit is “singular” in a way that frustrates an eliminative reduction of classical to quantum physics. We show one precise sense in which quantum mechanics and scaling behavior can be used to recover classical mechanics exactly, without making prior reference to the classical theory. To do so, we use the tools of strict deformation quantization, which provides a rigorous way to capture the ℏ → 0 limit. We then use the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Minkowski Space from Quantum Mechanics.László B. Szabados - 2024 - Foundations of Physics 54 (3):1-48.
    Penrose’s Spin Geometry Theorem is extended further, from SU(2) and E(3) (Euclidean) to E(1, 3) (Poincaré) invariant elementary quantum mechanical systems. The Lorentzian spatial distance between any two non-parallel timelike straight lines of Minkowski space, considered to be the centre-of-mass world lines of E(1, 3)-invariant elementary classical mechanical systems with positive rest mass, is expressed in terms of E(1, 3)-invariant basic observables, viz. the 4-momentum and the angular momentum of the systems. An analogous expression for E(1, 3)-invariant elementary quantum mechanical (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reductive Explanation and the Construction of Quantum Theories.Benjamin H. Feintzeig - 2022 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 73 (2):457-486.
    I argue that philosophical issues concerning reductive explanations help constrain the construction of quantum theories with appropriate state spaces. I illustrate this general proposal with two examples of restricting attention to physical states in quantum theories: regular states and symmetry-invariant states. 1Introduction2Background2.1 Physical states2.2 Reductive explanations3The Proposed ‘Correspondence Principle’4Example: Regularity5Example: Symmetry-Invariance6Conclusion: Heuristics and Discovery.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Localizable Particles in the Classical Limit of Quantum Field Theory.Rory Soiffer, Jonah Librande & Benjamin H. Feintzeig - 2021 - Foundations of Physics 51 (2):1-31.
    A number of arguments purport to show that quantum field theory cannot be given an interpretation in terms of localizable particles. We show, in light of such arguments, that the classical ħ→0\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$$\hbar \rightarrow 0$$\end{document} limit can aid our understanding of the particle content of quantum field theories. In particular, we demonstrate that for the massive Klein–Gordon field, the classical limits of number operators can be understood to encode local information about particles (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark