What is quantum field theory? A quantum information theorist’s perspective

Daniel Burgarth and Matt Leifer have really been an inspiration for me as they have successfully embraced and exploited new technologies to improve scientific communication and discourse. One of their innovations, with the help of Ravi Kunjwal, has been the Q+ hangouts talk series. This excellent series of talks is delivered online via google hangouts, and has now attracted a wonderful line up of topics and speakers. It has also inspired the TCS+ hangouts series.

Last week I had the honour and pleasure to participate in the Q+ hangout series. I spoke about a topic very close to my heart, namely, quantum field theory, and would like to share the video with you here today

In this talk I described a way to formalise Wilson’s approach to quantum field theory as an effective theory in quantum information theorist friendly terms. If you are interested in seeing the details behind what I discussed in the talk then please do check out the (as yet still incomplete) paper draft of the content at my github repository. This paper contains very many definitions and worked out examples. The purpose of my talk and the paper is to provide a definition for what a quantum field state is in such a way that it: (a) matches the modern Wilsonian definition used by physicists; (b) allows us to answer quantum information theory style questions about QFT; and (c) is mathematically rigourous (or, at least, rigourisable…)

If you feel like contributing to this project then please don’t hesitate to fork the github repository!


2 Responses to What is quantum field theory? A quantum information theorist’s perspective

  1. Thanks a lot for the kind words Tobias – I very much enjoyed your talk! I should say that the Q+ hangouts are a joint initiative of Matt Leifer and me, and that we very much appreciate the help we get from Ravi Kunjwal. Cheers Daniel

    • tobiasosborne says:

      Dear Daniel,

      Many thanks for your comment. That was a bad oversight of mine — I will edit the post right away to clarify this. I certainly didn’t intend to ignore Matt and Ravi’s contribution!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: