What are the implications of light having both wave and particle properties?

  • Thread starter SimonA
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Time
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of energy being both a wave and a particle, the connection between time and space, and the possibility of time being particulate with a minimum size. It also mentions the speed of light and how it affects our perception of physical objects. The idea of living in a dimensional pit and the existence of other dimensions is also mentioned, along with the concept of "dark matter" and the difference between strong and weak nuclear forces. The conversation also touches on the dual nature of light and the idea of dimensions being more than just physical extensions.
  • #1
SimonA
176
0
We understand something about energy in that its both a wave and a particle. We also know that time and space are connected in a deep way, and that time is not as smooth as it seems.

So the time that we (and our tools) experience as sensory beings, should surely be both wave and particle like. And if time was particulate in some way (as the evidence would suggest), then its particles would have a minimum 'size', like the Plank 'size'. Given that hypothesis, there would have to be a limit on maximum velocity, given the nature of time. Let's be colloquial and call it "the speed of light".

What we do know about light is that it has a direct nature for something with such a wavy character. If it was purely particulate, human vision of physical objects would compromised. So we know that the photons that hit our eyes (or our detectors) have traveled what can only be a straight path. But we know from Youngs experiment (et al) that light dissipates like a wave that could end up connecting to the first detector it comes across.

I suspect that if we really look at it, we live in a dimensional pit where we think that forwards,backwards, up, down etc, represents some kind of totality. If there really is a limit on velocity in this lower 'superdimension', as there seems to be, how long will it take us to also understand that just as zero point energy is an escarpment we live on, there are other escarpments and tiers we know very little about at present ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Consider this hypothesis. Gravity does indeed "leak". "Dark matter" is matter ... but in what physicists mistakenly call another dimension, as if dimensionality is about physical extension.

What is the real difference between the strong and weak nuclear forces ?
 
  • #3
As you note, time,space,distance are likely discrete with Planck like minimums...yet no one really knows for sure if like light, Planck length would be relativistically viewed as a minimum constant or shrink via lorentz contraction.

So we know that the photons that hit our eyes (or our detectors) have traveled what can only be a straight path

not so; general relativity and experiments prove light is curved by spacetime in gravitational potential...that's what the Einstein stress energy tensor computes...half the curve is classical (Newtonian) due to mass, half is due to spacetime curvature. It only appears as straight line via local free falling frame of reference when spacetime curvature approaches flat spacetime...small distance observations...

yes, light has a wave particle duality as explained by quantum theory...but it's dual manifestations as via double slit experiments hints at underlying complexity.

"..what physicists mistakenly call another dimension, as if dimensionality is about physical extension..."

via string theories, it appears to be so...
 

FAQ: What are the implications of light having both wave and particle properties?

What does it mean for time to be particulate?

When we say that time is particulate, we are referring to the concept that time is made up of discrete, indivisible units rather than being continuous. This means that time can be thought of as ticking or moving in a series of distinct moments rather than as a smooth, continuous flow.

How do scientists study the particulate nature of time?

Scientists study the particulate nature of time through various fields such as physics, cosmology, and quantum mechanics. They use experiments, observations, and mathematical models to understand how time behaves at the smallest scales and how it interacts with other fundamental particles and forces in the universe.

Is there evidence to support the idea of time being particulate?

While the concept of time being particulate is still a subject of debate and further research, there is evidence to support this idea. One of the key pieces of evidence comes from quantum mechanics, which suggests that at the subatomic level, particles can exist in multiple states simultaneously, seemingly defying the notion of a continuous flow of time.

Can time ever be observed or measured as a particle?

No, time cannot be observed or measured as a particle in the same way that we can observe and measure other fundamental particles such as electrons or protons. Time is a fundamental aspect of the universe and cannot be broken down into smaller units. Instead, we can only observe and measure its effects on other particles and systems.

What are the implications of time being particulate?

The implications of time being particulate are far-reaching and still not fully understood. It could have implications for our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics, the nature of reality, and even the concept of free will. Further research and experimentation are needed to fully grasp the implications of this concept.

Similar threads

Back
Top