Probability and Time

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The description of probability waves being related to all particles whether very small like neutrinos or very large like the earth under the wave particle duality, appears to make the wave aspect relevant at neutrino size but not relevant at earth size. ( De Broglie ) This I understand relates to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle being currently discussed in the Quantum Physics Forum .

 

 

One aspect of probability has connotations of " one moment here" probably or " one moment in TIME " there probably.

 

IF ( SPECULATION ) we were to take ourTime Out of the aspect of probability, then surely the particle would or could be everywhere that the probability waveform allows. ( Shroeneger ) Which appears to be what happens sometimes. ( eek sometimes is a contradictory idea ). Say elecron shells/energy levels and quantum tunneling.

 

Has the idea of probability not the idea of possibility. When we are dealing with quantum particles, :-

Then this is not our reality ie not in our time , but rather :-

In the quantum time and thus quantum reality. ( what ever quantum time is ? Timeless ? Relativistic time ? No time ? whatever ?).

and ( whatever quantum reality is for that matter ? )

 

Then when we OBSERVE or some system of our reality observes the particle, it becomes part of our time and our reality. Thus the Probability wave collapses and the small particle has to adopt an allowable position in our reality. Leaving particles to be free in their quantum world , well , all over the place all the time.

( whose time theirs or ours ? ) ( Maybe they are not in any time that we can relate to ).

 

Could this be what is happening in the double slit experiment when we observe the photon or electron after coming through the slit and the wave aspect collapses and the particle is in one place or the other, whereas unobserved the wave aspect does not collapse and the particle ( electron or photon ) goes or appears to go through both slits and cause an interference wavelike pattern ?

 

. WHAT SAY YOU ?

.

Edited October 15, 2012 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

 

 

Then when we OBSERVE or some system of our reality observes the particle, it becomes part of our time and our reality. Thus the Probability wave collapses and the small particle has to adopt an allowable position in our reality. Leaving particles to be free in their quantum world , well , all over the place all the time.

( whose time theirs or ours ? ) ( Maybe they are not in any time that we can relate to ).

 

Could this be what is happening in the double slit experiment when we observe the photon or electron after coming through the slit and the wave aspect collapses and the particle is in one place or the other, whereas unobserved the wave aspect does not collapse and the particle ( electron or photon ) goes or appears to go through both slits and cause an interference wavelike pattern ?

 

 

.

 

Did I say something fundamentally WRONG or has this all been covered before .

 

I always thought this wave particle duality issue was part of the Richard Feynman " If you understand Quantum Mechanics then you have got it wrong " conflict.

 

.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Did I say something fundamentally WRONG or has this all been covered before .

 

I always thought this wave particle duality issue was part of the Richard Feynman " If you understand Quantum Mechanics then you have got it wrong " conflict.

 

.

 

If this could be applied to the Multi-verse theory then there is ONE REALITY ( that which has been observed, (touched ) and multi possibilities which have not been observed.

.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

If this could be applied to the Multi-verse theory then there is ONE REALITY ( that which has been observed, (touched ) and multi possibilities which have not been observed.

.

 

Perhaps Ajb can come up with something !

.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The description of probability waves being related to all particles whether very small like neutrinos or very large like the earth under the wave particle duality, appears to make the wave aspect relevant at neutrino size but not relevant at earth size. ( De Broglie ) This I understand relates to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle being currently discussed in the Quantum Physics Forum .

 

 

One aspect of probability has connotations of " one moment here" probably or " one moment in TIME " there probably.

 

IF ( SPECULATION ) we were to take ourTime Out of the aspect of probability, then surely the particle would or could be everywhere that the probability waveform allows. ( Shroeneger ) Which appears to be what happens sometimes. ( eek sometimes is a contradictory idea ). Say elecron shells/energy levels and quantum tunneling.

 

Has the idea of probability not the idea of possibility. When we are dealing with quantum particles, :-

Then this is not our reality ie not in our time , but rather :-

In the quantum time and thus quantum reality. ( what ever quantum time is ? Timeless ? Relativistic time ? No time ? whatever ?).

and ( whatever quantum reality is for that matter ? )

 

Then when we OBSERVE or some system of our reality observes the particle, it becomes part of our time and our reality. Thus the Probability wave collapses and the small particle has to adopt an allowable position in our reality. Leaving particles to be free in their quantum world , well , all over the place all the time.

( whose time theirs or ours ? ) ( Maybe they are not in any time that we can relate to ).

 

Could this be what is happening in the double slit experiment when we observe the photon or electron after coming through the slit and the wave aspect collapses and the particle is in one place or the other, whereas unobserved the wave aspect does not collapse and the particle ( electron or photon ) goes or appears to go through both slits and cause an interference wavelike pattern ?

 

.

.

 

.

 

. I wish somebody would have a go at discussing this issue as I cannot seem to move forward in my thinking on this matter.!

 

 

.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The subject of time and its connotation of passing of time, seems to conjure up the Idea of change.

 

The earth turning once , a day of approx 24 hours of time . Of the change in seasons , four being a change of one circuit of the sun , being a year , or approx 365 and a quarter days. Somebody somewhere sorted changes which were agreed to be hours , minutes and seconds. And of course we can go Bigger like the milky way turning once every 1-2 million years. or go smaller like so many milliseconds, microseconds , nanoseconds being a thousandth of a second, a millionth of a second, and an English billionth of a second. probably those last two loose identification. Nonetheless they are used in modern electronics, i pads, mobile phones etc. Because of demands for precision now the Cesium atom is used as a time piece . With global positioning systems accurate times are mandatory. So we have and do live out here in the changing periods of time , and love every minute of it. (oops).

 

Now lets get inside the atom at the quantum level. Maybe we don't see or experience any of those things just mentioned ( apart from the cesium atom clock , which I may have to leave out of my argument, so as not to make things confusing.

 

So what sort of time do we have in here, Quantum time but whats that. Relative time, relative to what because we are inside the atom. No time as we are used to knowing it ?

 

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Edited November 13, 2012 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Dekan]

The subject of time and its connotation of passing of time, seems to conjure up the Idea of change.

 

The earth turning once , a day of approx 24 hours of time . Of the change in seasons , four being a change of one circuit of the sun , being a year , or approx 365 and a quarter days. Somebody somewhere sorted changes which were agreed to be hours , minutes and seconds. And of course we can go Bigger like the milky way turning once every 1-2 million years. or go smaller like so many milliseconds, microseconds , nanoseconds being a thousandth of a second, a millionth of a second, and an English billionth of a second. probably those last two loose identification. Nonetheless they are used in modern electronics, i pads, mobile phones etc. Because of demands for precision now the Cesium atom is used as a time piece . With global positioning systems accurate times are mandatory. So we have and do live out here in the changing periods of time , and love every minute of it. (oops).

 

Now lets get inside the atom at the quantum level. Maybe we don't see or experience any of those things just mentioned ( apart from the cesium atom clock , which I may have to leave out of my argument, so as not to make things confusing.

 

So what sort of time do we have in here, Quantum time but whats that. Relative time, relative to what because we are inside the atom. No time as we are used to knowing it ?

 

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

This is a good question. What would you see, if you were inside an atom? Doesn't the answer depend on what kind of atom it is.

 

For example, suppose you're in a hydrogen atom. Then you'll just see a proton at the centre, with an electron perpetually orbiting around it. And that situation will continue for ever (unless the central proton eventually decays - but that's another story). The point is - inside a Hydrogen atom, the situation is stable and unchanging. So there's no apparent way to measure time within the atom - no change, hence no time.

 

However - what if the atom you're in, is made of Uranium. The Uranium atom isn't stable. It keeps throwing out particles, until it eventually decays into an atom of Lead. This steady process of decay will be seen by an observer within the atom.

 

Won't that make the observer aware of the steady passage of time?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

This is a good question. What would you see, if you were inside an atom? Doesn't the answer depend on what kind of atom it is.

 

For example, suppose you're in a hydrogen atom. Then you'll just see a proton at the centre, with an electron perpetually orbiting around it. And that situation will continue for ever (unless the central proton eventually decays - but that's another story). The point is - inside a Hydrogen atom, the situation is stable and unchanging. So there's no apparent way to measure time within the atom - no change, hence no time.

 

However - what if the atom you're in, is made of Uranium. The Uranium atom isn't stable. It keeps throwing out particles, until it eventually decays into an atom of Lead. This steady process of decay will be seen by an observer within the atom.

 

Won't that make the observer aware of the steady passage of time?

 

Uum ! I need to think on that one. ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

 

The initiation of the decay I believe comes from the weak atomic force of the electro-weak force. Which is random but within the outside half life of 4,500,000,000 years. ( Because we don't know anything about years on the inside of the atom ) Which although the average half life is predictable , the individual emission of a radio active decay is not predictable. So even this outside change is not a reliable time duration . Also I am not personally sure what actually initiates the decay from within the Electro-weak force. We need an atomic scientist to tell us that one.

 

If however we had only ever known the inside of this particular Uranium atom, we could not see the sun, the earth rotating, the galaxy rotating, or anything else for that matter. We would see a decay happen now any again with no regular (interval ) Would we have a need for time or any concept of time. Time long or short with relation to what ? I know this is a bit philosophical. But we are discussing this in the very actual quantum subject of ( space and time ).

 

While inside the electro- weak force/ particles there is likely to be some form of probability issue. ( not being a statistician ) I am not sure what drives the initiation of the decay ! It is this aspect of the relationship of probability to time or just ( 1 in 100,000,000,000 ) that fires off the next decay ? Don' t know that bit.

 

Is there some internal clock that somehow tosses a coin that only comes down heads 1 in 100,000,000,000 times or what ? Or is there some other quantum random process that fires the decay ? I need to think , research, and think again !

 

..................................................Does Plank time come in operation here, acting as some universal time clock , working within the atom at the quantum level of things ?..... Don't know !

 

 

.

.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

 

How does time work inside the atom. ?

 

.Is there any link with Probability ?

 

.What happens as we approach Plank time ?

 

.What do we figuratively see if we go shorter than plank time ?

..