Re:Quantum Physics Falls Apart Without Imaginary Numbers
by C-x_C-f on Tuesday April 25, 2023 @06:48AM
(#35698703)
> don't think that imaginary or complex numbers have physical significance.
Yeah I'd say that's the most common approach but I think it's misguided. Complex numbers aren't any less physical than any other number. It just turns out that for historical reasons, it makes sense to define observable quantities using self-adjoint operators (which have real eigenvalues, and the latter are used to measure things like energy). But that doesn't mean the rest is not physical. Just because we can't take a picture of an object in the dark, it doesn't mean the object isn't there when the lights are off.
Re:Quantum Physics Falls Apart Without Imaginary Numbers
by scotty79 on Tuesday April 25, 2023 @07:44AM
(#35699117)
I'd say that complex numbers are the only ones that have physical significance. They are what's actually happens in the real world until we disturb it with experiment.
Yeah I'd say that's the most common approach but I think it's misguided. Complex numbers aren't any less physical than any other number. It just turns out that for historical reasons, it makes sense to define observable quantities using self-adjoint operators (which have real eigenvalues, and the latter are used to measure things like energy). But that doesn't mean the rest is not physical. Just because we can't take a picture of an object in the dark, it doesn't mean the object isn't there when the lights are off.