Is There a Smallest Time Interval in the Quantum World?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether there exists a smallest time interval in the quantum world, exploring theoretical implications, interpretations of Planck time, and the relationship with Lorentz invariance. The scope includes theoretical and conceptual considerations in quantum physics.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants mention Planck time as a candidate for the smallest unit of time, suggesting it could represent a limit in quantum physics.
  • Others argue that if a smallest time interval existed, it would not be Lorentz-invariant, implying the existence of a privileged frame of reference.
  • One participant proposes the idea of quantizing proper time while allowing coordinate time to vary, raising questions about the implications for time intervals.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes that Planck time does not function like a discrete clock but rather as a resolving power, beyond which events cannot be meaningfully ordered.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about whether there is a smallest time interval, suggesting that the significance of intervals may depend on observational limits rather than strict quantization.
  • A later reply introduces the notion that if other dimensions are involved, it may be possible to extend time granularity, challenging the idea of a smallest quant.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the existence of a smallest time interval, with multiple competing views and interpretations presented throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of time and the unresolved nature of how quantum mechanics interacts with concepts of time quantization.

Mr Peanut
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Is there a smallest time interval?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is there a smallest time interval?
If there was, it wouldn't be Lorentz-invariant. There would be some privileged frame with minimal time quant and we could check whether we move relative to it.
 
Couldn't you just quantize proper time then, and let coordinate time be anything?
 
Mr Peanut said:
Is there a smallest time interval?

It's not a smallest interval in the sense of a pixel grid for pictures, where you snap from one to the other. As another reply explains, that would not be Lorentz-invariant.

However, the Planck time (about 5.4e-44 s) is a "smallest interval" in the sense that if two events occur that close together you can't meaningfully say that one came first. In quantum physics, you only ask about ranges: does some event occur in this box, with what probability? Will my particle act between t1 and t2? The theory of QM doesn't work smaller than that. Maybe something else does; we don't know yet.

It's not a tick, tick, tick snap of discrete clock points. But it's a resolving power, where you can't tell apart anything that close together.
 
JDługosz said:
It's not a smallest interval in the sense of a pixel grid for pictures, where you snap from one to the other. As another reply explains, that would not be Lorentz-invariant.

However, the Planck time (about 5.4e-44 s) is a "smallest interval" in the sense that if two events occur that close together you can't meaningfully say that one came first. In quantum physics, you only ask about ranges: does some event occur in this box, with what probability? Will my particle act between t1 and t2? The theory of QM doesn't work smaller than that. Maybe something else does; we don't know yet.

It's not a tick, tick, tick snap of discrete clock points. But it's a resolving power, where you can't tell apart anything that close together.

Sounds to me like there is a smallest time interval then, since anything beyond observation is not significant.
 
does some event occur in this box, with what probability?
If you're talking about box, you must have some other dimensions involved. Then you can extend the other dimensions and get smaller time granularity - and there is no smallest quant.
If you don't use other dimensions and the "box" is made of time alone, then you get a pixel grid. Translational symmetry may still hold, but Lorentz transformations give you a preferred frame.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K