The Feynman path integral does not allow a one real path interpretation, because the quantum amplitudes contribute to probabilities in a non-separable manner. The opposite extreme, all paths happen, is not a useful or informative account. In this paper it is shown that an intermediate parsing of the path integral, into realistic non-interfering possibilities, is always available. Each realistic possibility formally corresponds to numerous particle paths, but is arguably best interpreted as a spacetime-valued field. Notably, one actual field history can always be said to occur, although it will generally not have an extremized action. The most obvious concerns with this approach are addressed, indicating necessary follow-up research. But without obvious showstoppers, it seems plausible that the path integral might be reinterpreted to explain quantum phenomena in terms of Lorentz covariant field histories. Quanta 2016; 5: 1–11.
The Feynman path integral does not allow a one real path interpretation, because the quantum amplitudes contribute to probabilities in a non-separable manner. The opposite extreme, all paths happen, is not a useful or informative account. In this paper it is shown that an intermediate parsing of the path integral, into realistic non-interfering possibilities, is always available. Each realistic possibility formally corresponds to numerous particle paths, but is arguably best interpreted as a spacetime-valued field. Notably, one actual field history can always be said to occur, although it will generally not have an extremized action. The most obvious concerns with this approach are addressed, indicating necessary follow-up research. But without obvious showstoppers, it seems plausible that the path integral might be reinterpreted to explain quantum phenomena in terms of Lorentz covariant field histories. Quanta 2016; 5: 1–11.
Feynman path integrals formalism for non-relativistic quantum mechanics is revisited. A comparison is made with the cases of light progagation (Huygens principle) and Brownian motion. The difficulties for a physical model behind Feynman formalism are pointed out. It is proposed a reformulation where the transition probability from one space-time point to another one is the sum of probabilities of the possible paths. The Born approximation for scattering is derived within the formalism, which suggests an interpretation in terms of particles, without the need of Born assumption that the modulus squared of the wavefunction is a probability density.
Quantum mechanics is often contrasted with its classical counterpart. This distinction is nearly “washed out” when quantum statistics for bosonic systems are formulated in terms of Feynman’s path integrals [1]. These provide a unique possibility of projecting subtle quantum mechanical properties into the language of classical statistics of closed trajectories in (d+1)-dimensional space. We note, however, that the corresponding projection and an intuition associated with it require that the statistics of path integrals be sign-positive (which is not the case for the generic fermionic system). Indeed, for the positive definite statistics, one can appeal to properties of “typical” configurations contributing to the answer and then estimate probabilities of atypical configurations to occur. If configurations contribute to the statistics with the sign or, in a more general case, with phase factors, then the notion of typical and relevant configurations is misleadingconfigurations with large modulus and opposite sign cancel each other to a large degree in the final answer, and only their combined effect has a physical meaning.
The Feynman path integral formalism for non-relativistic quantum mechanics is revisited. A comparison is made with cases of light propagation (Huygens' principle) and Brownian motion. The difficulties for a physical model applying Feynman's formalism are pointed out. A reformulation is proposed, where the transition probability of a particle from one space-time point to another one is the sum of probabilities of the possible paths. As an application, Born approximation for scattering is derived within the formalism, which suggests an interpretation involving the stochastic motion of a particle rather than the square of a wavelike amplitude.
The conventional approach to quantum mechanics begins with the classical Hamiltonian and changes observables to noncommuting operators. Canonically conjugate observables have to be noncommuting operators in order to satisfy the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. The dynamics of a quantum mechanical system is given by the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. In the early 1940s Feynman realized that it would be possible to construct a quantum model using the classical Lagrangian approach (a method closely related to the action integral). Dirac had earlier pointed out that eit times the Lagrangian was analogous to a transformation function for the wave function in which the wave function at one instant could be related to the wave function at a next instant in a time interval of t by multiplying with such an exponential function. Feynman found the exponential phase factor to be the action S which is the time integral of the Lagrangian. Further, he noticed that it was necessary to perform integrals over all space variables at every instant of time to find the transition amplitudes. He developed a way for describing and evaluating the integration using the idea of integral over all paths. In Feynman’s approach, the particles are described using amplitudes calculated along the paths they may or may not follow. These amplitudes behave like waves, their phase changes as the quantum system moves along the path and the amplitudes for all paths superpose and interfere. This interference between all paths is called as sum-over-histories and the resulting amplitude is connected in the same way that the amplitude of a wave function is linked to probability as magnitude-squared.
Abstract Path integrals are a central tool when it comes to describing quantum or thermal fluctuations of particles or fields. Their success dates back to Feynman who showed how to use them within the framework of quantum mechanics. Since then, path integrals have pervaded all areas of physics where fluctuation effects, quantum and/or thermal, are of paramount importance. Their appeal is based on the fact that one converts a problem formulated in terms of operators into one of sampling classical paths with a given weight. Path integrals are the mirror image of our conventional Riemann integrals, with functions replacing the real numbers one usually sums over. However, unlike conventional integrals, path integration suffers a serious drawback: in general, one cannot make non-linear changes of variables without committing an error of some sort. Thus, no path-integral based calculus is possible. Here we identify which are the deep mathematical reasons causing this important caveat, and we come up with cures for systems described by one degree of freedom. Our main result is a construction of path integration free of this longstanding problem, through a direct time-discretization procedure.
In 1948, Richard Feynman published the first paper on his new approach to non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Before Feynman's work there were two mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger's formulation was based on PDE (the Schrödinger equation) and states representation by wave functions, so it was in the framework of analysis and differential equations. The other formulation was Heisenberg's matrix algebra. Initially, they were thought to be competing. The proponents of one claimed that the other was “ wrong. ” Within a couple of years, John von Neumann had proved that they are equivalent.\nAlthough Feynman's theory was not fundamentally new, it nonetheless offered an entirely fresh and different perspective: via a precise formulation of Bohr's correspondence principle, it made quantum mechanics similar to classical mechanics in a precise sense. In addition, Feynman's approach made it possible to explain physical experiments, and, via diagrams, link them directly to computations. What resulted was a very powerful device for computing energies and scattering amplitudes - the famous Feynman's diagrams.\nIn his formulation, Feynman aimed at representing the solution to the non-relativistic Schrödinger equation in the form of an “ average ” over histories or paths of a particle. This solution is commonly known as the Feynman path integral. It plays an important role in the theory but appears as a postulate based on intuition coming from physics rather than a justified mathematical object. This is why Feynman's vision has caught the attention of many mathematicians as well as physicists.\nThe papers of Gelfand, Cameron, and Nelson are among the first, and more substantial, attempts to supply Feynman's theory with a rigorous mathematical foundation. These attempts were followed by many others, but unfortunately all of them were not quite satisfactory. The difficulty comes from a need to define a measure on an infinite-dimensional space of continuous functions that represent all possible paths of a particle. This Feynman's measure has to produce an integral with the properties requested by Feynman. In particular, the expression for the Feynman measure has to involve the non-absolutely integrable Fresnel integrands. The non-absolute integrability of the Fresnel integrands makes the measure fail to be positive and to have the countably additive property. Thus, a well-defined measure in the case of the Feynman path integral does not exist.\nExtensive research has been done on the methods of relating the Feynman path integral to the integral with respect to the Wiener measure. The method of analytic continuation in mass defines the Feynman path integral as a certain limit of the Wiener integrals. Unfortunately, this method can be used as definition for only almost all values of the mass parameter in the Schrödinger equation. For physicists, this is not a satisfactory result and needs to be improved.\nIn this work we examine those questions which originally led to the Feynman path integral. By now we know that Feynman's “ dream ” cannot be realized as a positive and countably additive measure on the path-space. Here, we offer a new way out by modifying Feynman's question, and thereby achieving a solution to the Schrödinger equation via a different kind of averages in the path-space.\nWe give our version of the question that Feynman “ should have asked ” in order to realize the elusive path integral. In our formulation, we get a Feynman path integral as a limit of linear functionals, as opposed to the more familiar inductive limits of positive measures, traditionally used for constructing the Wiener measure, and related Gaussian families. We adapt here an approach pioneered by Patrick Muldowney. In it, Muldowney suggested a Henstock integration technique in order to deal with the non-absolute integrability of the kind of Fresnel integrals which we need in our solution to Feynman's question. By applying Henstock's theory to Fresnel integrals, we construct a complex-valued “ probability distribution functions ” on the path-space. Then we use this “ probability ” distribution function to define the Feynman path integral as an inductive limit. This establishes a mathematically rigorous Feynman limit, and at the same time, preserves Feynman's intuitive idea in resulting functional. In addition, our definition, and our solution, do not place any restrictions on any of the parameters in the Schrödinger equation, and have a potential to offer useful computational experiments, and other theoretical insights.