Can a Single Particle Move in an Empty Universe?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the theoretical implications of a single elementary particle existing in an empty universe and its ability to move. Participants concluded that without a reference frame or other particles, the particle's movement would be undetectable and indistinguishable from being stationary. If the particle were to accelerate, it could emit radiation or gravitational waves, but such acceleration requires interaction with other particles, which is absent in this scenario. Thus, the concept of movement is inherently relative, as established by Einstein's principles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity
  • Basic knowledge of elementary particle physics
  • Familiarity with concepts of motion and reference frames
  • Awareness of radiation and gravitational wave emission
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Einstein's theory of relativity and its implications on motion
  • Explore the properties of elementary particles and their interactions
  • Study the principles of radiation and gravitational wave detection
  • Investigate thought experiments in physics and their relevance to theoretical scenarios
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of theoretical physics, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of motion and measurement in the universe.

CaptDude
Messages
29
Reaction score
9
Question: If there were only a single elementary particle in the entire universe - could it move, and if so, how would its movement be measured?
 
Space news on Phys.org
CaptDude said:
Question: If there were only a single elementary particle in the entire universe - could it move, and if so, how would its movement be measured?
The only reference frame to measure any movement would be its own, in which by definition it cannot move.

Garth
 
CaptDude said:
Question: If there were only a single elementary particle in the entire universe - could it move, and if so, how would its movement be measured?
Well, any constant motion would be undetectable. But if it were possible for the particle to accelerate, that could (probably) be detected, because if this particle had electric charge, acceleration would cause it to radiate. A change in the acceleration would cause it to emit gravitational waves.

That said, if there wasn't some other particle around, there'd be nothing to cause it to accelerate (or change its acceleration), so it'd just have constant motion which is undetectable and indistinguishable from being stationary.
 
CaptDude said:
If there were only a single elementary particle in the entire universe - could it move, and if so, how would its movement be measured?

If there is only a single elementary particle in the universe, what measuring device would be used to measure its movement?
 
lol it takes physics to do physics!
 
PeterDonis said:
If there is only a single elementary particle in the universe, what measuring device would be used to measure its movement?

New
Well, since my post says it is a "thought experiment" I'm sure you could think of something....
 
CaptDude said:
since my post says it is a "thought experiment" I'm sure you could think of something

No, I can't. That's why I asked the question. It's your thought experiment. If you can't think of something either, what does that tell you?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Nugatory
PeterDonis said:
If there is only a single elementary particle in the universe, what measuring device would be used to measure its movement?

CaptDude said:
New
Well, since my post says it is a "thought experiment" I'm sure you could think of something....

While thought experiments do allow for highly impractical parameters ("...imagine I flew my starship to the centre of the sun"), those parameters have to be ones that aren't directly relevant to the thought experiment.

In your scenario, the concept of measuring movement is directly relevant: movement is not an absolute - it must be relative to something (Einstein taught us that) - requiring at least two particles.

So, I guess you have answered your own question.
 
DaveC426913 said:
While thought experiments do allow for highly impractical parameters ("...imagine I flew my starship to the centre of the sun"), those parameters have to be ones that aren't directly relevant to the thought experiment.

In your scenario, the concept of measuring movement is directly relevant: movement is not an absolute - it must be relative to something (Einstein taught us that) - requiring at least two particles.

So, I guess you have answered your own question.

Thank you for your CONSTRUCTIVE comment. I see your point and thank you for taking the time to write something that is informative.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K