Is Time Elapsed During Photon Absorption a Quantum Illusion?

[tmoan]

just a thought.
if the energy of a photon E= hf.
and an electron can receive or loose photons in such energies only.
and the electron can not absorb half of the photon then the other half just a full quantum at a time.
doesn't that mean is some sort of way that there is no time elapsed relative to the electron between starting the absorption and end of absorption.
because if there was then we can write a formula that says the electron absorbed the photon in a time dt= tf -ti
so then ti + ( dt/ 2) is half the time so if the equation is linear then half the energy was absorbed by that time...
please add your comments on this
i do not have a strong background in general relativity just special.
so if this is tackled somewhere please explain

thanks

 

[DaveC426913]

just a thought.
if the energy of a photon E= hf.
and an electron can receive or loose photons in such energies only.
and the electron can not absorb half of the photon then the other half just a full quantum at a time.
doesn't that mean is some sort of way that there is no time elapsed relative to the electron between starting the absorption and end of absorption.
because if there was then we can write a formula that says the electron absorbed the photon in a time dt= tf -ti
so then ti + ( dt/ 2) is half the time so if the equation is linear then half the energy was absorbed by that time...
please add your comments on this
i do not have a strong background in general relativity just special.
so if this is tackled somewhere please explain

thanks

In my own limited understanding, this is one of the unanswered questions. Electrons and photons are considered point-sources in GR, then the energy exchange over time is 1/0.

String theory models electrons and photons as one dimensional objects, thus the energy transfer is not infinite.

 

[tmoan]

with all due respect to all the people who are working day and night to write these theories in a book for me to read it.
my opinion is that most those theories have holes and missing pieces like these.
i think that scientists are taking short cuts more than they are formulating well defined theories.
of course if you take them as one dimensional, then it gets easy but why are we in a 3 dimensional world at least 3 dimensional if electrons and energy in whatever form is 1 dimensional. for all we our 3d world is made of electrons and the energy it gain or loose.

i understood that case in GR but what i am saying is that if those hold true then time itself is either quantized.
or our whole definition of time being elapsed without going back or altering is somewhere wrong.
i think most of our obstacles in modern physics are because of humans' limited wisdom.
time is culture related more than a physical entity.
its something we devised to calculate our life terms. and failed to alter it till Einstein i think.so i am getting ahead of myself, but i don't want to study a theory then find out there are explanations somewhere for the weaknesses of it...

 

[peter0302]

my opinion is that most those theories have holes and missing pieces like these.
i think that scientists are taking short cuts more than they are formulating well defined theories.

Well, those shortcuts have led to some of the most useful technology in history, namely transistors, just to name one. Just because you don't know everything there is to know doesn't mean you can't make useful science out of what you _do_ know. Renormalization is a necessary evil. Doesn't mean people aren't trying to find better theories - they are - but why not take what you have and run with it until they do?

 

[tmoan]

ya your probably right i was just saying why run away from what works and try those exotic theories that don't.
i am disappointed in the fact that even after all the open mindedness towards science humans could never think out of their own nature and formulate a working theory.

you are right when you said why not go with them till we have something better.
i didn't mean to say we shouldn't. of course we should.

i am just pointing out that the only models we have are either waves(like water)
or photons(like objects).
and most of what i know with my limited knowledge manipulates the mathematical formulas to better suit one of the 2.

when we know electromagnetism is nothing like water or a ball hitting the pavement and reflecting with energy loss. we know "how it works" but never could find out why.

and by the way i only stated the second note because i was simply disappointed by the fact that this question is not answered clearly
thanks for the comment

 

[peter0302]

ya your probably right i was just saying why run away from what works and try those exotic theories that don't.
i am disappointed in the fact that even after all the open mindedness towards science humans could never think out of their own nature and formulate a working theory

There are certainly lots of people working on it. That's what string theory and all the other "post-quantum" theories are trying to do. It ain't easy. :) Look how long it took to go from Newtonian Mechanics to Quantum Mechanics. I don't think we can expect advances overnight.

Keep in mind, a lot of people on here are here for the purpose of assisting physics students with current QM problems, and so that's naturally going to focus on more orthodox QM and less of the far-fetched stuff. But again, the far-fetched stuff is definitely being worked on.