也是一只自由泳的小鸟
you think I’m going to explain it to you so you can understand it? No, you’re not going to be able to understand it. Why, then, am I going to bother you with all this? Why are you going to sit here all this time, when you won’t be able to understand what I am going to say? It is my task to convince you not to turn away because you don’t understand it. You see, my physics students don’t understand it either. That is because I don’t understand it. Nobody does.
我好像是第一次看书的时候看 foreword preface 和 introduction 这么认真，因为我怀疑正文我都看不懂
Every particle in Nature has an amplitude to move backwards in time, and therefore has an anti-particle. […] I’d like to show you what this backwards-moving electron looks like to us, as we move forwards in time. […] We start at T0 with an electron moving toward a photon, which is moving in the opposite direction. All of a sudden—at T3—the photon turns into two particles, a positron and an electron. The positron doesn’t last very long: it soon runs into the electron—at T5, where they annihilate and produce a new photon. Meanwhile, the electron created earlier by the original photon continues on through space-time.
所以，电子是真的进行了时光倒流，只不过在随着时间正向流动的人眼里看来就成了正电子吗
还是说这是一个假说/理解方程的角度？
@unagi 这个可以叫做对数学上出现的“负能量解”的一种“诠释”吧，比如目前通用的 “正向时间拥有正能量的反粒子” 是 Feynman-Stückelberg interpretation（其实我也还没接触过别的合理诠释）
@QuantumBubbleTea 我就感觉这样来看的话真相就是“相对”的，反正我们也只能通过观测和推断来了解世界，而（在我的理解里）不存在直接了解到真相的途径，那么任何一种合理自洽的“诠释”都可以是对的。
@unagi 嗯就像量子力学也有多种诠释，只不过哥本哈根学派的诠释比较主流……但其实理论的诠释并不完全是物理学范围内的东西了，物理学只负责建模描述实验验证这些……