User talk:Trompedo

Path Integrals in Phase Space

I insist this is not the right forum to discuss the history of science, which would be most appropriate for a physics forum. Nevertheless, your aspersions could be hardly left uncountenanced! Feynman, of course, wrote his widely popular PhD dissertation on path integrals in coordinate space, in 1942 RPF thesis, and the formula you are referring to, in coordinate space, is already in Dirac's "The Lagrangian in quantum mechanics" , Phys. Z. der Sowjetunion, 3, 64-71 (1933), specifically eqn (11). Feynman of course had already summarized it all in his review, Rev Mod Phys 20 (1948), 367-87, which Moyal, of course, references in his paper, ref (26), I hope you noticed. I would never dream of ascribing any path integral priorities to Moyal---that was the whole point of my rhetorical question above! I suspect a careful rereading of Moyal's paper will dispel any misconstruing. I merely pointed out infinitely recursive formulas in phase space start with Moyal's paper, and make an arc all the way to Marinov's. You may inquire User:Taulalai for further subtlety, if you are so inclined, and if you believe Leaf has anticipated Marinov, which I do not. However, I really believe Path integral formulation is the place to fuss these matters. Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 20:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Trompedo (talk) 19:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

continued from Talk of Wigner quasi Probability distribution:

Sure, if you believe symbolic iteration of the relation is a major logical step, congratulations might be in order---but of course this would not be a surprise to Moyal... That was my point above that "infinitely recursive formulas in phase space start with Moyal's paper, and make an arc all the way to Marinov's." Leaf is, of course, on that arc; but, unlike Feynman, who actually added on concrete tidbits to Dirac's formula, the Normalization of the path integral which mattered, the clean derivation of the Schroedinger picture, the entire vision, etc, (see his Book with Hibbs), I see no explicit problems solved in Leaf's making explicit the Markov structure.... I evidently (see discussion) had similar qualms about Marinov's paper, and that's why you might wish to clear it with the vector of its being cited! Cuzkatzimhut (talk) 13:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well ... I have to consult with Ms. Pendleton. Trompedo (talk) 18:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She does not answer. Trompedo (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A kitten for you!

Hope you can cook!

Katherine Pendleton (talk) 16:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]