Re: When do we need renormalization

From: Eugene Stefanovich (eugenev_at_synopsys.com)
Date: 12/25/04 

Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2004 21:26:23 +0000 (UTC)

Arnold Neumaier wrote:
> Eugene Stefanovich wrote:
>
>
>>I think these views are prevailing at the moment. My work on RQD,
>>however, shows that all renormalization problems can be solved without
>>such an assumption, and a consistent theory of charged particles and
>>photons can be constructed on its own without any reference to
>>something "more fundamental".
>
>
> You are claiming far too much.
>
> You haven't shown your theory to be consistent. You only constructed a
> sequence of approximate Hamiltonians with neither Lorentz invariance
> nor gauge invariance. Consistency would require that you can show
> that a limiting Hamiltonian exists which gives rise to a theory
> having both these properties.
>
>
> Arnold Neumaier
>

I have said repeatedly that I agree with you. I do not have
a proof that the series for the Hamiltonian converge. Just as
traditional QED does not have a proof that the series for the
S-matrix converges. My statements are valid only in the case
of such convergence.

Eugene Stefanovich.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: When do we need renormalization
    ... >>You haven't shown your theory to be consistent. ... >>sequence of approximate Hamiltonians with neither Lorentz invariance ... >>Arnold Neumaier ... > a proof that the series for the Hamiltonian converge. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Finite time calculation in QED
    ... Eugene Stefanovich wrote: ... > Arnold Neumaier wrote: ... >>If the Hamiltonian is H then ... >>as always in quantum mechanics. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: When do we need renormalization
    ... Arnold Neumaier wrote: ... I agree to moderate my claims in the sense that I do not have ... >>a proof that the series for the Hamiltonian converge. ... Eugene Stefanovich. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Connes & Marcolli paper on renormalization
    ... Arnold Neumaier wrote: ... > Eugene Stefanovich wrote: ... I don't see how Hamiltonian can be finite when parameters e and m ... turn out to be infinite after renormalization. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Connes & Marcolli paper on renormalization
    ... Eugene Stefanovich wrote: ... The perturbation series for the renormalized S-matrix does not ... Hamiltonians of the textbook kind, your series for the Hamiltonian might ... Arnold Neumaier ...
    (sci.physics.research)