Can there be time without mass?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter guptasuneet
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of time in relation to mass, particularly in the context of relativity. Participants explore whether time can exist in a universe composed solely of massless objects, such as photons, and the implications of such a scenario on the measurement and definition of time and space.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that according to relativity, objects traveling at the speed of light do not experience time due to time dilation, raising questions about the existence of time without mass.
  • Others argue that spacetime exists independently of massive or massless particles, suggesting that time could still be defined in a universe of massless objects.
  • A participant challenges the notion that one can travel at the speed of light relative to another frame, stating that the Lorentz Transformation is only valid for velocities less than the speed of light.
  • Some participants express confusion about measuring time in a universe of massless objects, questioning how time and space would be defined without any massive entities to create measuring devices.
  • There is a discussion about the reciprocal nature of time dilation, where both observers in different frames perceive time dilation in the other, complicating the understanding of absolute time measurement.
  • One participant introduces the concept of a "radiation dominated universe," suggesting that spacetime geometry can exist even with massless objects, while others ponder the relationship between spacetime and mass/energy.
  • Several participants express uncertainty about whether spacetime can exist without mass or energy, likening it to a chicken-and-egg problem regarding which comes first.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence of time without mass, with multiple competing views and ongoing debates about the implications of relativity and the nature of spacetime.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unresolved mathematical steps regarding the Lorentz Transformation at light speed, and the dependence of definitions of time and space on the presence of mass or energy.

  • #61
Photons are no classical point particles. It doesn't make much sense to say they'd travel along worldlines whatsoever. They are not localizable. See also the very interesting discussion going on in the quantum theory forum:

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/single-photon-states.1048604/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: malawi_glenn
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Lluis Olle said:
But, what happens when photons are slowed down? I'm not referring to the obvious refraction index, but to experiments like the one described in the article (I don't know if it's a reputable source...):

Researchers stop and store light for 60 seconds
"Photons being slowed down" is not a good description of what is happening in these experiments.

Ibix said:
Then they are travelling on timelike worldlines and proper can be defined along those worldlines.
This is not a good description of what is happening in the experiments referred to.

timmdeeg said:
They don't seem to travel at all.

https://newatlas.com/stopping-light-inside-crystal/28610/
The photons are converted into atomic spin excitations (or "spin waves"), which can be stored in the crystal until the control beam is fired again and the spin waves are turned back into light, which finally escapes the crystal.
While this ordinary language description still leaves a lot out, at least it acknowledges that the photons have to be "converted" into something else--photons themselves are not being "slowed down" or "stopped".

Further discussion of these experiments belongs in a separate thread in the quantum physics forum. It is off topic here.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, timmdeeg and vanhees71
  • #63
Thanks everyone for participating in the discussion and for some mind opening replies. What I have understood from the discussion till now is:
  1. Spacetime is definable independent of the presence of any particles in it
  2. Concept of time cannot be defined for a particle with zero rest mass
  3. Interactions between the particles with zero rest mass can be used to define / measure time, even in a spacetime consisting only of such particles with zero rest mass
Not sure if the above summary is proper and request that I may please be corrected.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix and PeroK
  • #64
guptasuneet said:
Thanks everyone for participating in the discussion and for some mind opening replies. What I have understood from the discussion till now is:
  1. Spacetime is definable independent of the presence of any particles in it
  2. Concept of proper time cannot be defined for a particle with zero rest mass
  3. Interactions between the particles with zero rest mass can be used to define / measure time, even in a spacetime consisting only of such particles with zero rest mass
Not sure if the above summary is proper and request that I may please be corrected.
The only thing I'd add is to emphasise that proper time cannot be defined for a particle with zero rest mass.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix and Sagittarius A-Star

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
617
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K