How many ticks would an instantaneous clock have in a minute?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Physics is awesome
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Photography Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of capturing an instantaneous moment in time, particularly in relation to photography and the nature of time itself. Participants explore the implications of defining an "instant" as having zero duration and how this relates to the functioning of cameras and clocks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions why cameras cannot capture an instant of time defined as having zero duration, suggesting that this would eliminate issues like motion blur.
  • Another participant humorously asserts that capturing an instant of zero duration would result in a black image, as no light would enter the camera.
  • A participant further explores the idea of a clock that ticks at an "instantaneous moment with 0 duration," asking how many ticks it would have in a minute.
  • One participant elaborates on the limitations of camera sensors, explaining that exposure times must be non-zero to capture images, as zero duration would yield zero photons detected.
  • A later reply reiterates the trick question about the clock, suggesting that not opening the shutter at all could be perceived as capturing zero time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of capturing an instant of zero duration, with some engaging in humor and others providing technical reasoning. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of such a concept.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the physical limitations of cameras and the nature of time, but the discussion does not resolve the underlying philosophical questions about the existence of an instant with zero duration.

Physics is awesome
Messages
14
Reaction score
1
just wondering why no one has made a camera that can truly capture an instant of time. I'm talking about an instant which is defined as an instantaneous moment that has 0 duration. Why do all cameras have shutters that open for a specified amount of time instead of just capturing a true instant of time which has a 0 for actual time that is past. Basically what I'm asking is if an instant of time exists as part of the physical world which has a duration of 0 time why can't we capture this instant on a camera instead of a camera being exposed for a specified amount of milli seconds it should just be an instant which would then never produce a blurry image since it wouldn't matter how fast matter is moving.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
:welcome:

You won't like this. A silly answer for a silly question. In zero time, zero light will enter the camera, so a picture of an instant is by definition just black. Therefore, all black pictures show zero time.

I suspect that you may have a better question than that, so think about it, rephrase it and try again.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur, Comeback City and Chestermiller
Physics is awesome said:
I'm talking about an instant which is defined as an instantaneous moment that has 0 duration.
A trick question for you:
If we had a clock that ticked not each second (nor millisecond, nor microsecond, nor nanosecond etc) but each what you call "instantaneous moment that has 0 duration", then how fast would that clock tick? How many ticks would it do, let's say, each minute?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Comeback City
Physics is awesome said:
Basically what I'm asking is if an instant of time exists as part of the physical world which has a duration of 0 time why can't we capture this instant on a camera instead of a camera being exposed for a specified amount of milli seconds it should just be an instant which would then never produce a blurry image since it wouldn't matter how fast matter is moving.

Let's assume we have a brightly lit scene and my camera sensor is taking in, on average, 1,000,000 photons per pixel per second (this is close to a realistic number). So I go ahead and take a picture. Oh no! This is far too many photons for my camera sensor to handle! The entire sensor array is saturated and my image is pure white! What can I do about it?

The easiest thing to do is to simply reduce the exposure time. So I change my camera settings and set my exposure time to 1/10th of a second. Now my camera sensor is picking up 100,000 photons/pixel. Unfortunately, this is still too high and I need to reduce my exposure time again.

Okay, now my exposure time is 1/50th of a second and my camera sensor is detecting on average of 20,000 photons/pixel. Much better! Now I have a good looking image!

Notice that all of my exposures have been of non-zero duration. This is because over a timeframe of zero, my camera's sensor detects zero photons! I actually can't even make my camera record a duration of zero! Even the physical processes that have to happen in order for the camera to start and end its exposure require non-zero duration. It's simply not possible, and even if it were, I would detect zero photons anyways.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn, scottdave and Comeback City
DennisN said:
A trick question for you:
If we had a clock that ticked not each second (nor millisecond, nor microsecond, nor nanosecond etc) but each what you call "instantaneous moment that has 0 duration", then how fast would that clock tick? How many ticks would it do, let's say, each minute?

Ha! Just don't open the shutter at all, and as far as you know, it did open for zero time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K