Time and Space Distortions of Photons: What Am I Misunderstanding?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Involute
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Photons Space Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of photons in the context of Special Relativity (SR), particularly focusing on their movement, perception of time and space, and the implications of traveling at the speed of light. Participants explore misconceptions and clarify the theoretical framework surrounding these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that photons do not perceive time or space because they travel at the speed of light, suggesting that they appear stationary to an outside observer at their moment of creation.
  • Others argue that the idea of photons being stationary is incompatible with the hypothesis that they move at the speed of light, emphasizing that photons in a vacuum move at a constant speed denoted by ##c##.
  • One participant challenges the notion of time and space distortions in SR, stating that all effects arise from different choices of spacetime division rather than actual distortions.
  • Another participant questions the use of the term "perceive," clarifying that light does not have the capacity to perceive anything, similar to an electron, and that there is no inertial frame of reference for a photon.
  • It is noted that while the distance through spacetime along a lightlike path is zero, the events along that path are distinct and can be identified using other parameters.
  • One participant suggests that the original poster should focus on the mathematical framework of SR rather than relying on vague descriptions from popular science articles.
  • A later reply emphasizes that there is no inertial frame in SR where a photon would be at rest, and thus it is nonsensical to discuss what a photon can see or how it perceives the universe.
  • Participants highlight that proper time for a photon is zero, which is often misinterpreted to mean that time does not pass for a photon, but this interpretation is considered careless.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of photons and their relationship with time and space in SR. There is no consensus on the interpretations of these concepts, and several misconceptions are identified and debated.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the reliance on popular science interpretations, which may oversimplify complex concepts in SR, and the challenge of discussing phenomena that do not have a defined rest frame.

Involute
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
If photons are subject to SR spatial and temporal distortions, how are we able to see them move?
As I understand it, photons are subject to the same time and space distortions under SR as anything else, which is why they don't perceive time or space, since they travel at the speed of light. To an outside observer, then, they should appear stationary, immobile at their moment of creation. Of course, we perceive them as moving, or else we wouldn't be able to see anything. What am I misunderstanding?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Involute said:
What am I misunderstanding?
One hypothesis of SR is that photons (light) move at the speed of light. That is incompatible with your hypothesis that they do not move. Experiment decides the issue. Photons (light) in a vacuum move at the constant and invariant speed denoted by ##c##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Involute said:
since they travel at the speed of light. To an outside observer, then, they should appear stationary
By that reasoning, the faster something moves the slower it moves.
 
Involute said:
they don't perceive time or space, since they travel at the speed of light.
This is a common pop science misconception, but it's still a misconception.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
Involute said:
As I understand it, photons are subject to the same time and space distortions under SR as anything else,
There are no space and time distortions in SR. All of the effects in SR are a result of different choices of how to divide spacetime into space and time - this does not involve anything being distorted or curved.
Involute said:
they don't perceive time or space,
What do you mean by "perceive"? Light doesn't perceive anything, any more than an electron does. Usually, what is meant here is that it isn't possible to construct an inertial frame of reference traveling at the speed of light, which is true, but that doesn't stop us describing light as moving in our frames of reference. Certainly the points along the path of a light ray are distinct.
Involute said:
To an outside observer, then, they should appear stationary, immobile at their moment of creation.
No. The problem is that the "distance" through spacetime along a lightlike path is zero, but the events along that path are distinct. When you are talking about "time for light" you are talking about that distance along its path, but because that is always zero you can't use it to distinguish between the events. You can, however, use other parameters (such as your own rest frame's coordinate time) to identify them.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sysprog and vanhees71
Involute said:
What am I misunderstanding?
Basically everything. You should look at what the math of SR actually says, instead of those vague natural language descriptions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and PeroK
Hi.
You're doing well and taking an interest in Physics, we're all going to like that. You've stumbled on some Pop Sci articles and you are, quite correctly, identifying problems with what they've implied in their simplification.

Involute said:
As I understand it, photons are subject to the same time and space distortions under SR as anything else, which is why they don't perceive time or space
That's the bit I would suggest you focus on if you want to make sense of the various comments already received. Firstly, there isn't a good reason to assume a photon is a little person who can perceive anything but let's put that to one side for the moment. When people talk about what an observer perceives or can see then they are generally talking about what they will determine in their own rest frame using the natural co-ordinates of that rest frame. It's their own rest frame which is the key to what they will see.

There isn't any inertial frame in SR where a photon would be at rest. To say that more clearly: Photons do not have a rest frame. As a consequence it's a non-starter to ask what a photon can see or how it perceives the universe. You can't sensibly express anything that a photon can see in it's own rest frame.

You can ask other questions, such as how much proper time elapses for a photon (the answer is none at all). This is often carelessly used to suggest that time doesn't pass for a photon. It's careless because proper time isn't going to be the photons co-ordinate time in any inertial frame of reference you can use. To phrase that more clearly: It's never going to be just a time interval for anyone or anything in any sensible frame.

Best Wishes.

LATE EDITING: @Ibix has already written something about rest frames by the time I finished this post.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK, vanhees71 and Dale

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
343
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K