Talk:Ghost (physics)

Requested move 4 July 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: MOVED. Hadal (talk) 21:22, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Ghosts (physics) → Ghost (physics) – We may talk about a (Landau) ghost, singular should be the standard. MaoGo (talk) 08:40, 4 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Support Agreed, singular is is fine here and preferred for titles. -- 23:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Support I agree that singular is better for use in titles. Also, I think the opening sentence should be revised to something like the following: "In the terminology of quantum field theory, a ghost, ghost field, or gauge ghost is an unphysical state of a gauge theory." XOR&#39;easter (talk) 19:01, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Done --MaoGo (talk) 08:15, 10 July 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Too advanced
This seems confusingly advanced and not understandable for most people. I think there’s a template for it, but I’m not sure the exact template Pokeswap (talk) 12:08, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
 * maybe you are looking for this Template:Technical, yet I would advise against it, this is indeed a technical subject that it is already advanced for the average physicist that does not do high energy physics.--ReyHahn (talk) 13:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Electromagnetism and ghosts
The article states ‘An example of the need of ghost fields is the photon, which is usually described by a four component vector potential Aμ, even if light has only two allowed polarizations in the vacuum.’

Electromagnetism does not require a ghost field. The restriction to two polarisation directions van be understood without resorting to this technique. Aoosten (talk) 09:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)