Re: On explanation of negative energy states and electron pair creation

Thus spake Hendrik van Hees <hees@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Oh No wrote:


I find the Stuckelburg-Feynman interpretation better, that negative
energy particles are particles for which proper time is reversed. They
are literally particles going backwards in time. Then the creation of
a negative energy particle appears from the point of view of
macroscopic time as the annihilation of a positive energy one.

They go forward in time with reversed momentum. By definition, there is
nothing going backward in time in physics!


One has to distinguish between time as we define it, and time as it is
defined by nature. I distinguish here between macroscopic time, which we
measure and which goes forward by our empirical definition, and proper
time, which applies to any matter, but which we cannot measure directly
- e.g. we cannot measure proper time for a distant galaxy, although we
can very reasonably define cosmic time, meaning proper time from the big
bang.

It is reasonable to think that a concept of proper time applies to
particles in the quantum domain. Clearly this is not the same as
macroscopic time. E.g. it is measureably not the same for particles at
high momenta in accelerators. Nor could it be in a relativistic theory.

If you define proper time of an elementary particle to be always
forwards you are making a non-empirical assumption about the behaviour
of matter. That is not science, it is metaphysics and it is speculative.
Feynman and Stuckelburg have pointed out that if you make no such non-
empirical assumption then you get a very simple and easy to understand
explanation for antimatter, which makes complete sense of the appearance
of such states in the Dirac equation. In the absence of any such
explanation based on the assumption that proper time is always forwards,
there is a strong reason to believe that your definition is inconsistent
with nature.

Regards

--
Charles Francis
substitute charles for NotI to email

.