Do Photons Perceive Time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RaptorHunter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photons Time
RaptorHunter
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
It's my understanding (I might be talking senescence) that as an object approaches the speed of lights time starts to slow down, and if it achieves the speed of light time would stop.
Do photons experience time?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you take the formula for proper time (the time "experienced") and if you apply that formula to a pulse of light then you get 0. However, I am not sure if it is appropriate to call that quantity "proper time" any more.
 
RaptorHunter said:
It's my understanding (I might be talking senescence) that as an object approaches the speed of lights time starts to slow down,
Yes, objects can approach the speed of light as close as you want and time for that object will slow down according to the Inertial Reference Frame (IRF) in which you are specifying the speeds, a clock traveling with that object will tick more slowly than the Coordinate Time of the IRF. Note that we define time by what a clock measures.

RaptorHunter said:
and if it achieves the speed of light time would stop.
But no object (including a clock) can approach and achieve the speed of light so your understanding is flawed on this point. Since no clock can travel at the speed of light, time is not defined at the speed of light. It's not that time has slowed to a stop at the speed of light, it's that time is meaningless (without a definition) at the speed of light.

RaptorHunter said:
Do photons experience time?
Since you can't build a clock out of just photons, the answer would have to be "no". But I would rather say that time does not apply to photons. You can establish the time it takes for photons to travel from point A to point B according to a particular Inertial Reference Frame (IRF) but that time can be different in another IRF because the distance between those two points can be different in different IRF's and the speed of light is the same in all IRF's.

Does that make perfect sense to you?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes RaptorHunter
See the forum FAQ on why photons do not have a rest frame:

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/rest-frame-of-a-photon.511170/

Since photons do not have a rest frame, they do not "experience time", since that requires a rest frame. (More precisely, applying the concept of "proper time", which is what is needed to "experience time", requires the object to have a rest frame.)

DaleSpam said:
I am not sure if it is appropriate to call that quantity "proper time" any more.

I don't think it is, for the reasons given above and in the FAQ.
 
  • Like
Likes RaptorHunter and bcrowell
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top