B New idea about wave-particle duality - looking for feedback/criticism

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter fbas
  • Start date Start date
fbas
Messages
1
Reaction score
6
TL;DR Summary
New idea about wave-particle duality: photons are particles, but are perceives as waves because their time frame is different than ours
Hi everyone! I'm new here and I've been thinking about the double-slit experiment and came up with what might be a completely wrong idea, but I'd love to hear your thoughts.
The basic idea: You know how in the double-slit experiment, photons behave like waves when unobserved but collapse to particles when we measure them? Well, I was thinking about the fact that photons travel at c, which means time essentially stops for them (γ → ∞).
What if
…..
[Speculative theory removed by mentor edit]
….
Any thoughts, references, or reality checks would be much appreciated!

P.S. - If this has been proposed before and debunked, please point me to the literature. I'd rather learn from existing work than reinvent the wheel.
Thanks for reading!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
fbas said:
Any thoughts, references, or reality checks would be much appreciated!
You have been victimized by pop-sci misdescriptions.

The entire notion of “wave-particle duality” was abandoned as a false start almost a century ago and is not part of the modern understanding of quantum mechanics. There’s no substitute for a real textbook with its non-trivial mathematical prerequisites (which is how the wave-particle duality persists in non-technical explanations), but you might give Giancarlo Girardi’s book “Sneaking a look at God’s cards” a try as a layman-friendly explanation of QM as it is now understood.

The bit about time stopping for photons is another popular misconception. The time dilation formula you’re using to get that result is derived starting from assumptions that are equivalent to ##v\lt c##, so does not apply when we set ##v=c##. It is as if we started with the premise “consider the integers ##a## and ##b## such that ##(\frac{a}{b})^2=2##” - the strange and wonderful results that would follow are just the math telling us that it doesn’t work here. There are many threads here discussing this “time stops” misunderstanding, but if you are serious about understanding the theory behind the time dilation formula you will want to try Taylor and Wheeler’s “Spacetime Physics”, the first edition is available free online.

As this thread is based on a misunderstanding, it is closed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes PeroK, PeterDonis and fbas
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
I am reading WHAT IS A QUANTUM FIELD THEORY?" A First Introduction for Mathematicians. The author states (2.4 Finite versus Continuous Models) that the use of continuity causes the infinities in QFT: 'Mathematicians are trained to think of physical space as R3. But our continuous model of physical space as R3 is of course an idealization, both at the scale of the very large and at the scale of the very small. This idealization has proved to be very powerful, but in the case of Quantum...
Thread 'Lesser Green's function'
The lesser Green's function is defined as: $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\langle C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\rangle=i\bra{n}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(t')C_{\nu}(t)\ket{n}$$ where ##\ket{n}## is the many particle ground state. $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{n}e^{iHt'}C_{\nu}^{\dagger}(0)e^{-iHt'}e^{iHt}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ First consider the case t <t' Define, $$\ket{\alpha}=e^{-iH(t'-t)}C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt}\ket{n}$$ $$\ket{\beta}=C_{\nu}(0)e^{-iHt'}\ket{n}$$ $$G^{<}(t,t')=i\bra{\beta}\ket{\alpha}$$ ##\ket{\alpha}##...
Back
Top