sci.physics.research

In the current micro-thought, I present relativistic Lagrangians and
discuss several limitations of the field-theoretic approach.

This is motivated by the generalized belief on field theory as
fundamental or complete for modelling interactions either classical or
quantum.

First, I introduce some popular choices for field relativistic
Lagrangians.

Next, I list several fundamental limitations of the field theoretic
approach related to the relativistic equations of motion. This shows
that field theoretic formulations are not fundamental.

Those limitations are often unknown and still some authors try to get
some kind of "unified field theory" or believe that general relativity
(a metric formulation) is our last word about macroscopic gravity.

Authors who considered the field-theoretic description to be limited
and worked in alternatives includes celebrated Fokker, Dirac, Wheeler,
or Feynman, between others.

S. Weinberg has not provided us an alternative to the field paradigm
but at least he warns his readers in the page 1 of his textbook on
quantum field theory (vol. 1):

{BLOCKQUOTE
If it turned out that some physical system could not be described
by a quantum field theory, it would be a sensation; if it turned out
that the system did not obey the rules of quantum mechanics and
relativity, it would be a cataclysm.

In fact, lately there has been a reaction against looking at
quantum field theory as fundamental.
}

But field theory is not fundamental already at the classical level. We
need alternatives.

In a final step, I introduce an alternative formulation to
relativistic motion that does not use fields for modelling
interactions. It is a theory of action-at-a-distance dealing with
relativistic phenomena that relativistic field theory cannot. The
formulation contained in the monograph I cite has been worked in
detail in literature, including several applications in gravity,
quantum chemistry, and molecular physics.

Prof. Schieve is a recognized expertise on relativistic chaos. I do
not consider the theory he and others work to be the last word on
relativistic interactions (can one say the last word in science?). But
from the available theory detailed in the monograph you can easily see
what the traditional field theoretic view is missing about Nature.

Also I cite a recent ArXiv preprint by Eugene V. Stefanovich on
classical limit of quantum theory of gravity. Eugene develops the
classical limit corresponding to the action-at-a-distance theory he
develops.

/2007/08/

/2007/08/

Note: The version archived on Arxiv at this moment is number 5, which
contains some inaccuracies. Eugene is working in an improved version
would be ready this week

/group/ /tree/browse_frm/thread/c02d3e3ccccd887b/d0ad4ef9906b7167?rnum=181&_done=%2Fgroup%2F %2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2Fc02d3e3ccccd887b%3Fscoring%3Dd%26&scoring=d#doc_b14118cc006e4842

Note: Because some past episodes of flamming in
, both comments in the blog and my newsgroup e-
mail are disabled.