Can Each Particle Experience Time as Its Own Observer?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lnsanity
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Observer Point
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of whether each particle, such as quarks or electrons, can be considered as its own observer with a personal experience of time. Participants explore the implications of this idea in the context of general relativity and quantum mechanics, examining the terminology used in these theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions if each particle can be seen as an observer, suggesting that if there are limitations on what can be considered an observer, it may contradict Einstein's theory of general relativity.
  • Another participant agrees that each object can be treated as a frame of reference and challenges the notion that this presents a problem.
  • There is a discussion about the terminology, where one participant suggests that "observer" has been replaced by "frame of reference" or "coordinate system" in relativity to avoid confusion about the necessity of a conscious observer.
  • One participant speculates on the compatibility of relativity and quantum mechanics, questioning if relativity is valid at all scales except zero, while quantum mechanics is valid up to infinity.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of terminology, stating that "measurement" is a more accurate term than "observer" and is distinct from a frame of reference.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the terminology and implications of treating particles as observers. There is no consensus on whether this perspective is valid or problematic, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of the concepts involved and the potential for misunderstanding fundamental principles. The discussion highlights the evolving nature of terminology in physics, particularly in relation to observation and measurement.

lnsanity
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
Can I consider each particle as there own observer with there own personal experience of time say each quark or each electron ? Because I read that every observer is as valid as any. I know that general relativity is a theory applied to the very big and here I am asking question for the very small sorry if I on the verge of breaking down the theory I promise I won't do that again! I thought it was a theory of gravity and I thought if there is a size or type of object I can't consider as an observer than it is a contradiction with Einstein theory...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
lnsanity said:
Can I consider each particle as there own observer with there own personal experience of time say each quark or each electron ? Because I read that every observer is as valid as any. I know that general relativity is a theory applied to the very big and here I am asking question for the very small sorry if I on the verge of breaking down the theory I promise I won't do that again! I thought it was a theory of gravity and I thought if there is a size or type of object I can't consider as an observer than it is a contradiction with Einstein theory...
Yes, each object in the universe can be taken as a Frame of Reference, but I don't get why you think this could be any kind of problem.

And, just on general principles, if you come across something that you think is contradictory to GR, assume you have misunderstood.
 
I think maybe the answer is that the word "observer" as a term has kind of been replaced in relativity with "frame of reference" or "coordinate system", in order to remove the possible confusion that there needs to be someone doing the observing... kind of like on the quantum side where "observation" has been kind of replaced by "measurement" and that looks like that is being further replaced by "decoherence", in order to also remove any confusion about there having to be someone observing.

I wonder if it is correct to say relativity is good all the way down except at zero, and QM is good all the way up to infinity?
 
No I don't think it is problem I am just building up my knowledge foundation making sure I am not wrong with the fundamental.
And yes frame of reference is a better word than observer to describe the experience.
 
lnsanity said:
No I don't think it is problem I am just building up my knowledge foundation making sure I am not wrong with the fundamental.
And yes frame of reference is a better word than observer to describe the experience.
Just FYI, on terminology, the term "observer" is more correctly stated as "measurement" and is not at all the same as a Frame of Reference.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
814
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K