Photons and predestination

[Dennisg]

From the perspective of a photon traveling here from the big bang the world as it is now would appear to have been instantly created. For me this implies the idea of predestination. That is, everything that has happened and will happen was determined in the big bang itself. Hope you can follow my logic. It also implies that there is a unseen dimension which is timeless and in which all matter is in immediate contact with all other matter.

[foodchain]

From the perspective of a photon traveling here from the big bang the world as it is now would appear to have been instantly created. For me this implies the idea of predestination. That is, everything that has happened and will happen was determined in the big bang itself. Hope you can follow my logic. It also implies that there is a unseen dimension which is timeless and in which all matter is in immediate contact with all other matter.

 

I don’t know but I don’t think that can support why quantum interference would occur. I think refraction also shows it being a physical process and of course the fact chemical reactions can emit photons or absorb them this would suggest say hydrogen in space absorbing some amount of photons I think from some point of origin.

 

I think a neat question is if the speed of light is constant in a vacuum does it give an appearance of curvature due to gravity to a precision limited by such physical properties? Being this would change in time because of other forces such as gravity spacetime then would be just the curvature of things due to gravity as shown by how photons behave interacting with such. So if it were I guess a quantum field effect(plz correct me if wrong) light and gravity would be some interference pattern?

[throng]

From the perspective of a photon traveling here from the big bang the world as it is now would appear to have been instantly created. For me this implies the idea of predestination. That is, everything that has happened and will happen was determined in the big bang itself. Hope you can follow my logic. It also implies that there is a unseen dimension which is timeless and in which all matter is in immediate contact with all other matter.

 

I have a question which is probably commonly asked.

 

If a photon/observer takes no time to traverse distance it would mean he was at all points simutaneously. so the universe would be the size of the photon, from that perspective. It'd be infinitely small too. Or big, I don't know.

 

Is that hypothetically right?

[swansont]

It depends on the question of whether a photon experiences time, which we've discussed http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=34872

 

One problem being that much of the justification for the statement relies on relativity, which is valid for inertial frames. But a photon is not in an inertial frame.

[Sisyphus]

This is a bit out of my league, but as discussed in that other thread, it's not really appropriate to talk about what a photon experiences, since it's more like a "time doesn't apply" situation. As you approach c, the delta t approaches zero, but that's all.

 

I also don't follow your reasoning regarding predestination, but since your original premise is (apparently) wrong, it might not be worth explaining.

[throng]

I wonder if the probable location of a photon is within the universe, what determines its eventual arrival at an electron.

 

The electron's probable position is as large as the photon's so it all becomes 'unmissable'.

 

Its like all the wave functions merge into one huge function and it's all a part of the waves 'touching' or interacting.

[big314mp]

I also don't follow your reasoning regarding predestination

 

I think his original premise was that everything came from the big bang. Therefore, the current state of the universe is entirely described by the position and momentum (I think, correct me if I am wrong) of every particle present in the big bang.

 

IMO this doesn't take into account random events that are quantum in nature. So the original premise is still false.