Razor

Say person A just created a particle (high probability of one-particle state), is the probability of a very far away detector getting triggered (probability of finding a particle outside of its light cone) non-zero according to QFT?

Hi, this question was asked before but I didn't actually get what I was looking for so I thought I'd post the question here instead.

?

Imagine two charges (q). One is at the origin and the other one is at (0,r). Now if suddenly the charge on on one of them or both of them changes, the energy suddenly changes. And I think this cannot happen...So Energy Cons => Charge cons

But is charge conservation a result of energy conservation?

Hello. I don't know about Noether's theorem.

@Qmechanic I feel that you are a Goldstein expert. Can you take a look at this question physics.stackexchange.com/questions/351116/…

@Slarty Imaginary mass and violation of causality is just due to our extenstion of STL laws to FTL speeds. I'm just saying that travelling faster than light is not a nonsense statement. It is something we don't/can't know about.

@MooingDuck Why would it have infinite momentum/energy? The formulae that you have in mind are only valid for particles travelling at speed <c. Relativity simply doesn't talk about reference frames (particles moving) with speeds >c.

@Slarty I don't understand why FTL questions are dismissed by statements like yours. DrMcCleod is correct here. FTL is not prevented by any current theories and doesn't require an infinite amount of energy for it. Relativity just talks about speeds less than c. Ofc its impossible to accelerate to FTL from a lower speed but relativity never talks about scenarios where objects already have velocities >c. physics.stackexchange.com/questions/583358/… Check out this question for more details