Free Propagation and Successive Scattering

Chapter
Part of the Archimedes book series (ARIM, volume 26)

Abstract

From the time of his thesis and during his struggle to understand the Dirac equation, Feynman is preoccupied with finding the quantity that will determine the evolution of the wave function. While working on his thesis, he finds that the time evolution of the wave function is determined by the classical action, which is integrated along the possible paths that connect the start and end points of the particle. There is no classical action in the Dirac equation’s description of quantum electrodynamics (QED), since the equation introduced a new degree of freedom: spin. In RMP48, Feynman constructs an action that yields the Dirac equation using his quantization method. However, because he cannot justify the action independently, Feynman considers this treatment to be “purely formal” and unsatisfactory (see Section 3.5).

Keywords

Wave Function Pair Production Dirac Equation Quantum Electrodynamic Free Particle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Theory of Positrons; Self-Energy in an Atom; Radiation Scattering; Spreading Dirac Packet. (Ca. 1948). Series of selected folios from Box 13, Folder 1.Google Scholar
  2. Bopp, F. (1940). ‘Eine lineare Theorie des Elektrons’. In: Annalen der Physik 38, pp. 345–384.MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bopp, F. (1942). ‘Lineare Theorie des Elektrons. II’. In: Annalen der Physik 42, pp. 573–608.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. Carson, C. (1996a). ‘The Peculiar Notion of Exchange Forces–I: Origins in Quantum Mechanics, 1926–1928’. In: Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies In History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 27.1 (Mar. 1996), pp. 23–45.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carson, C. (1996b). ‘The Peculiar Notion of Exchange Forces–II: From Nuclear Forces to QED, 1929–1950’. In: Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies In History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 27.2 (June 1996), pp. 99–131.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fermi, E. (1932). ‘Quantum Theory of Radiation’. In: Reviews of Modern Physics 4.1 (Jan. 1932), pp. 87–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Galison, P. (1998). ‘Feynman’s War: Modelling Weapons, Modelling Nature’. In: Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies In History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 29.3 (Sept. 1998), pp. 391–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. McManus, H. (1948). ‘Classical Electrodynamics without Singularities’. In: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences 195.1042, pp. 323–336.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Schweber, S. S. (1994). QED and the Men Who Made It: Dyson, Feynman, Schwinger, and Tomonaga. Princeton: Princeton University Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Sauer, T. (2008). Remarks on the Origin of Path Integration: Einstein and Feynman. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/0801.1654.
  11. Schrödinger, E. (1930). ‘Über die kräftefreie Bewegung in der relativistischen Quantenmechanik’. In: Sonderausgabe aus den Sitzungsberichten der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phys. Math. Klasse 24. Berlin: Verlag der Akademie derWissenschaften in Kommission beiWalter de Gruyter u. Co. Reprinted in Schrödinger 1984, pp. 357–368, 418–428.Google Scholar
  12. Weiner, C. (1966a). ‘Interview with Dr. Richard Feynman, March 4 to June 28, 1966, Vol. 2’. Niels Bohr Library & Archives, American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Bern, History and Philosophy of Science, Exact SciencesBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations