Experimentally probing the photon's reference frame

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a photon's reference frame and its implications for diffraction patterns observed in different experimental setups. Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings of how a photon might perceive spatial dimensions and the effects of Lorentz transformations on its behavior in various configurations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes that a photon approaching a slit apparatus experiences a collapse of the longitudinal dimension, suggesting that it perceives only two dimensions due to Lorentz contraction.
  • Another participant questions the notion of a photon's frame of reference, emphasizing that a photon has a probabilistic distribution associated with its wavefunction.
  • A different viewpoint argues that the diffraction patterns produced by two different slit configurations will be distinct, as light interacts with matter in three-dimensional space.
  • One participant suggests that if the longitudinal dimension is indeed contracted for photons, then different apparatus configurations could yield equivalent diffraction patterns.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of a photon's reference frame and the implications for diffraction patterns. There is no consensus on whether the longitudinal dimension is collapsed or whether the diffraction patterns will be the same across different setups.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of discussing what a photon "experiences," noting that such notions may not be scientifically testable. The discussion also touches on the implications of Lorentz transformations in extreme cases, which remain unresolved.

DaTario
Messages
1,097
Reaction score
46
Hi All,

Suppose a photon is approaching the origin of set of three cartesian axes, along the negative part of the z axis.

If we put a slit, geometrically defined as:
1a) half plane z = 0 and x >= epsilon
2a) half plane z = 0 and x <= -1 * epsilon

Note that the slit width is 2 * epsilon.

After the photon has passed through it a diffraction pattern can be seen. We know it.

Now suppose this photon approaches the origin with a different structure put in its way.

Let this structure be defined as follows:
1b) half plane z = 0 and x >= epsilon
2b) half plane z = 1 and x <= -1 * epsilon


If the limiting case of Lorentz Transfomation to a c moving reference frame applies, the diffraction pattern should be the same in these two cases, for the photon would "see" the longitudinal dimension of our world condensed in one point, and so, both constructions would be the same to this photon.

Does this line of thought seem to be correct?

Best wishes

DaTario
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Please clarify what exactly you mean by a photon's 'frame of reference' , as the photon has a probabilistic distribution in keeping with its wavefunction.
 
The view I am trying to sustain here is that of a photon as a wave packet, whose peak travels at vectorial velocity (0, 0, c) and which comes from a source located at some large negative value of z axis.

Near the origin there are two options of apparatus, the first one being a regular slit of width 2 * epsilon. The second apparatus is also a slit in a certain sense, but one of its walls has been shifted 1 meter ahead in positive z direction.

If the behavior (interference behavior) is the same for these two setups then we have a point in favor of the statement that for the photon the longitudinal direction is collapsed and it experiences only two dimensions.

Of course, to see the interference behavior we will need a large amount of such photons, identically prepared.

I hope this have been of use.

Best Regards,

DaTario
 
If I've imagined your apparatus correctly, then the diffraction patterns will be different. When light interacts with matter it does so in normal 3D space. As for what light 'experiences', I don't think it is testable and so not interesting scientifically.
 
It is possible that Albert Einstein have been worried with not so interesting scientifically questions. I agree the word "experiences" humanizes the photon and so seems to be an irregular move on science game.
But my point here is that, using Lorentz Transformation in the limiting case where v tends to c, one is tempted to state that whatever moves together with such limiting reference frames, it will experience a lot of Lorentz contraction in its logitudinal dimension and no contraction at all in the other two, not to mention its time perspective. So we are led to the conclusion that, following the tendency of this limiting operation, photons have no longitudinal dimension, living in a projected 2D world.

And if this projection is true, then there are a class of equivalent apparatus, all similar to one slit, which yield the same diffraction pattern.

Best Regards,

DaTario
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K