Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Reconstruction of Quantum Field Theory as Extension of Wave Mechanics

Manfred Buth

Published Oct 1, 2014• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

The task to be carried out should be clear from the title. One motivation for this endeavour is coming from the fact that the usual version of quantum field theory is not acceptable. In the paper, above all, three intentions are pursued (a) an adequate consideration of the interaction (b) a proof that the means of classical field theory are sufficient (c) a new attempt to describe particles by stable wave packets.

Related papers

Description of Elementary Particles by Stable Wave Packets - A New Attempt

Manfred Buth

The attempt of Schrodinger to describe elementary particles by wave packets is repeated by means nowadays available, that is to say, by applying the results of quantum field theory and especially by the explicit consideration of interaction.

•Nov 1, 2015•0 citations

Postawić kwantową teorię pola z głowy na nogi część 1

Piotr Chankowski, Instytut Fizyki Teoretycznej,Wydział Fizyki UW

Despite the impression that can be gained from most of the standard textbooks, Dirac, Klein–Gordon and other wave equations do not constitute the basis of relativistic quantum field theory. In this article I attempt to show how it should be formulated properly and discuss some of its aspects which usually are presented unsatisfactorily. My aim is to cause the change in the way quantum field theory is taught.The text is split into three parts. In the first one I briefly recall the quantum field theory historical development and present its formulation as a quantum theory of interacting particles (relativistic or nonrelativistic).

Postępy Fizyki•Sep 20, 2023•1 citation

On the notion of reconstruction of quantum theory

Alexei Grinbaum

What belongs to quantum theory is no more than what is needed for its derivation. We argue for an approach focusing on reconstruction rather than interpretation of quantum mechanics and analyze several examples of reconstruction. We submit that reconstruction advances our understanding of quantum theory irrespective of one's ontological stance.

arXiv:quant-ph/0509104•Sep 15, 2005•4 citations

Kritische Analyse Der Quantenfeldtheorie Und Rekonstruktion im Rahmen Der Klassischen Feldtheorie

Manfred Buth

A critical inspection of quantum field theory will reveal that quantum field theory can be reconstructed only by means of classical field theory. In detail the following six assertions are claimed and proved: (1) Perturbation theory can be achieved by means of classical field theory. (2) Particles that are independent of one another are not correlated. This is especially true for the ingoing particles of scattering processes. (3) Outgoing particles in scattering processes are correlated. But the usual justification of quantum statistics is faulty. (4) In quantum field theory there is an amazing multitude of particle concepts. But a concise description of real existing elementary particles is lacking. (5) The path integral representation is not clearly defined in the particle picture of quantum mechanics. In the wave picture it is only another description of the expansion of a quantum state. (6) Functional representation is nothing else than a comprehensive version of perturbation theory.

•Jun 1, 2014•0 citations

The makeshift of wave mechanics

Erwin Schrödinger, Roger Penrose

Now I shall try to give you an idea of the way in which physicists at present endeavour to overcome this failure. One might term it an ‘emergency exit’, though it was not intended as such, but as a new theory. I mean, of course, wave mechanics. (Edding-ton called it ‘not a physical theory but a dodge— and a very good dodge too’.) The situation is about as follows. The observed facts (about particles and light and all sorts of radiation and their mutual interaction) appear to be repugnant to the classical ideal of a continuous description in space and time. (Let me explain myself to the physicist by hinting at one example: Bohr's famous theory of spectral lines in 1913 had to assume that the atom makes a sudden transition from one state into another state, and that in doing so it emits a train of light waves several feet long, containing hundreds of thousands of waves and requiring for its formation a considerable time. No information about the atom during this transition can be offered.) So the facts of observation are irreconcilable with a continuous description in space and time; it just seems impossible, at least in many cases. On the other hand, from an incomplete description—from a picture with gaps in space and time—one cannot draw clear and unambiguous conclusions; it leads to hazy, arbitrary, unclear thinking—and that is the thing we must avoid at all costs! What is to be done?

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Aug 13, 1996•0 citations

Deriving Some Results of Quantum Mechanics from Classical Physics

Ahmed El Houshy

The idea is that inside the phase of a wave, there exists a variational structure. This allows a correspondence with Hamiltonian Mechanics. This allows a correspondence between waves and particles. Combined with Dispersive Wave Theory, results from Quantum Mechanics follow.

Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics•Jan 1, 2025•2 citations
The task to be carried out should be clear from the title. One motivation for this endeavour is coming from the fact that the usual version of quantum field theory is not acceptable. In the paper, above all, three intentions are pursued (a) an adequate consideration of the interaction (b) a proof that the means of classical field theory are sufficient (c) a new attempt to describe particles by stable wave packets.
Despite the impression that can be gained from most of the standard textbooks, Dirac, Klein–Gordon and other wave equations do not constitute the basis of relativistic quantum field theory. In this article I attempt to show how it should be formulated properly and discuss some of its aspects which usually are presented unsatisfactorily. My aim is to cause the change in the way quantum field theory is taught.The text is split into three parts. In the first one I briefly recall the quantum field theory historical development and present its formulation as a quantum theory of interacting particles (relativistic or nonrelativistic).
A critical inspection of quantum field theory will reveal that quantum field theory can be reconstructed only by means of classical field theory. In detail the following six assertions are claimed and proved: (1) Perturbation theory can be achieved by means of classical field theory. (2) Particles that are independent of one another are not correlated. This is especially true for the ingoing particles of scattering processes. (3) Outgoing particles in scattering processes are correlated. But the usual justification of quantum statistics is faulty. (4) In quantum field theory there is an amazing multitude of particle concepts. But a concise description of real existing elementary particles is lacking. (5) The path integral representation is not clearly defined in the particle picture of quantum mechanics. In the wave picture it is only another description of the expansion of a quantum state. (6) Functional representation is nothing else than a comprehensive version of perturbation theory.
Now I shall try to give you an idea of the way in which physicists at present endeavour to overcome this failure. One might term it an ‘emergency exit’, though it was not intended as such, but as a new theory. I mean, of course, wave mechanics. (Edding-ton called it ‘not a physical theory but a dodge— and a very good dodge too’.) The situation is about as follows. The observed facts (about particles and light and all sorts of radiation and their mutual interaction) appear to be repugnant to the classical ideal of a continuous description in space and time. (Let me explain myself to the physicist by hinting at one example: Bohr's famous theory of spectral lines in 1913 had to assume that the atom makes a sudden transition from one state into another state, and that in doing so it emits a train of light waves several feet long, containing hundreds of thousands of waves and requiring for its formation a considerable time. No information about the atom during this transition can be offered.) So the facts of observation are irreconcilable with a continuous description in space and time; it just seems impossible, at least in many cases. On the other hand, from an incomplete description—from a picture with gaps in space and time—one cannot draw clear and unambiguous conclusions; it leads to hazy, arbitrary, unclear thinking—and that is the thing we must avoid at all costs! What is to be done?