Can Electron Fluctuations Lead to Quantized Time?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of electron fluctuations and their potential implications for the quantization of time. Participants explore the relationship between quantum mechanics, electric fields, and the behavior of electrons in various contexts, including quantum field theory and the collapse of wave functions. The conversation touches on theoretical implications and challenges posed by infinities in these frameworks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that if an electron exists in a local space and then disappears due to quantum fluctuations, it raises questions about the nature of time and whether it must be quantized.
  • Another participant argues that standard quantum mechanics does not constrain an electron's position to its light-cone, implying that probabilities do not lead to infinities.
  • There is a discussion about the need to quantize the electric field and switch to quantum field theory (QFT) for a proper understanding of these phenomena, especially in relativistic contexts.
  • One participant expresses concern about avoiding infinities related to the quantum nature of charge and questions whether quantized time or the interpretation of wave function collapse addresses this issue.
  • Another participant introduces the idea of considering an electron as an electromagnetic wave and discusses the implications of its movement in a magnetic field.
  • There is a debate about the instantaneous nature of wave function collapse during measurement and its potential to lead to infinite derivatives of quantities.
  • One participant reflects on a statement from a professor regarding the annihilation of charge and its catastrophic implications, questioning its validity and seeking clarification.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of electron fluctuations, the nature of time, and the handling of infinities in quantum mechanics. No consensus is reached, and multiple competing perspectives remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of their understanding and the complexities involved in interpreting quantum mechanics and field theory. The discussion reveals unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the behavior of electric fields and wave functions.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,252
Reaction score
2,664
Perhaps this is an easy one for you experts our there. When we consider an electron that occupies some local and small region of space, and then we assume that this electron [if it means anything to talk about a particular one] is un-measured - back in an unknown state- but that by the laws of physics it must still exist with some radius of our local space Ct, where t is the time since our last measurement of the position of charge q, and that this electron then disappears from this local space due to some quantum fluctuation, or by some other acceptable mechanism allowed by Quantum Theory [I don't claim to understand what I'm into here]. Then what about the dE/dt of local space - E being the electric field of local space? Do we require that time is quantized here, or can dE/dt become infinite? Am I way off track here? It seems to me - based on my limited understanding of such strange stuff - that this situation is allowed. But it also seems that if it ever did happen and we would all go to infinitely magnetic...which would seem to be a problem. But I also understand that quantized time is still considered an unresolved proposition. Enlightenment please?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Plain old quantum mechanics is not relativistic -- an electron measured to be at a particular position is not constrained to be within its light-cone in QM, which gives you some tiny probability of it being anywhere at finite time (nothing goes infinite.)

Of course this is incorrect. If you want to really talk about the electric field, you need to quantize that, and switch to quantum field theory (QFT.) This is usually required for highly relativistic systems, too, because those often create/destroy particles which is not allowed in regular QM.
 
OK. But given QFT or whatever proper option to address this issue, how do we avoid infinities due to the quantum nature of charge. Is the explanation quantized time, or is this a matter of properly interpreting the collapse of the wave function of the charge... I can't get past the problem that if charge is here and then not, i.e. if the wave function for the charge that was just here suddenly collapses at some distant location, which I think is allowed by some quantum processes, then it seems that something must save us from infinities. What? Time is the only thing that comes to mind
 
I consider, that your problem needs to be connected with moving of electron in magnetic field and to consider an electron, as one electromagnetic wave, which is closed as a ring.
In figure is shown frame with the current, which creates inwardly of frame homogeneous magnetic field. Shall conditionally consider, that this is so. Inwardly of frame there is moving ring with current J.
I can think that in the left part of ring a velocity of positive charges vj is totalized to the speed of moving of ring v. In this case, the ring will be move to the left.
I can think that in the right part of ring a velocity of electrons is totalized to the speed of moving of ring v. In this case, the ring will be move to the right.
I can think that both processes go simultaneously. In this case, the ring will not be move, nor to the left, nor to the right.
By the way, answer to this technical question till now is absent.
http://www.sibnet.ru/~polytron/mag_2.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I can't get past the problem that if charge is here and then not, i.e. if the wave function for the charge that was just here suddenly collapses at some distant location, which I think is allowed by some quantum processes, then it seems that something must save us from infinities.
Nope, if I understand your question correctly. Supposedly when a measurement is done, collapse is instantaneous, so you would have infinite derivatives of some quantities. The idea of measurement is sort of an abstraction/idealization, so you might be able to argue that there are no real infinities -- but that's beyond my knowledge.

However, if an electron were to be instantaneously annihilated, it's not like the EM field around it would just disappear -- it would decay, but not instantaneously. I think you could figure out exactly how just by playing with Maxwell's equations and boundary conditions, but I'm not sure.
 
Originally posted by damgo
Nope, if I understand your question correctly. Supposedly when a measurement is done, collapse is instantaneous, so you would have infinite derivatives of some quantities. The idea of measurement is sort of an abstraction/idealization, so you might be able to argue that there are no real infinities -- but that's beyond my knowledge.

However, if an electron were to be instantaneously annihilated, it's not like the EM field around it would just disappear -- it would decay, but not instantaneously. I think you could figure out exactly how just by playing with Maxwell's equations and boundary conditions, but I'm not sure.

Yes. As soon as you mentioned decay I wondered why this was not immediately obvious to me. Then I realized that I am recalling a statement by an undergrad prof who commented that if a charge was to simply disappear, the entire universe would be annihilated. [I think this is also supposed to happen with the intersection of two perfect EM plane waves...luckily nothings perfect]. Perhaps this comes from an outdated idea? I have no idea where he got this. Any ideas?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K