Time & Superposition: Rate of Observation

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rachel Lee Pierce
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Superposition Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the relationship between the passage of time and the observation of particles in a state of superposition, particularly in the context of quantum mechanics. Participants examine whether time can be understood as the rate at which particles collapse from superposition and how this relates to concepts of the past and future.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the passing of time could be viewed as the rate of observation leading to the collapse of particles from superposition, suggesting that collapsed states represent the past while uncollapsed states represent the future.
  • Others argue that all particles are always in a superposition of states and that measurement changes the state without causing a special irreversible collapse.
  • A participant elaborates on the concept of a particle's state as a vector that can be expressed in various bases, indicating that the notion of superposition applies to all states regardless of the basis used.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that since time is relative to the observer, the present moment could be considered the observation of a collapsed state, and that probabilities may change with each observation, influencing personal perceptions of the past.
  • One participant expresses skepticism towards the introduction of personal interpretations of quantum mechanics, implying that such ideas may not align with established quantum theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the interpretation of time in relation to quantum mechanics, with multiple competing views presented. There is no consensus on the relationship between observation, superposition, and the nature of time.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of quantum mechanics and the interpretation of time, which remain unresolved. The implications of different bases for vector representation and the subjective nature of time perception are also noted but not fully explored.

Rachel Lee Pierce
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Has anyone considered the possibility that the passing of time is simply the rate of observation of particles collapsing from superposition? And once collapsed, then this is what we understand as the Past, while those still in a probabilistic state is what we understand as the Future?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rachel Lee Pierce said:
Has anyone considered the possibility that the passing of time is simply the rate of observation of particles collapsing from superposition? And once collapsed, then this is what we understand as the Past, while those still in a probabilistic state is what we understand as the Future?

All particles at all times are in a superposition of states. A measurement (often) changes the state, but it doesn't collapse it in some special irreversible way.
 
PeroK said:
All particles at all times are in a superposition of states. A measurement (often) changes the state, but it doesn't collapse it in some special irreversible way.

Can you elaborate or back that up?
 
Rachel Lee Pierce said:
Can you elaborate or back that up?

A particle's state is essentially a vector. And, any vector can be expressed in any basis. You might say that something like the vector ##(1, 0, 0)## is special because it can be expressed as a single vector in the normal basis. Whereas the vector ##(1, 1, 0)## is the linear combination (superposition) of two basis vectors: ##(1, 1, 0) = (1, 0, 0) + (0, 1, 0)##.

But, if we look at these vectors in a different basis, then either or both are a linear combination of the basis vectors.

For example, if we take the simple vertical force of gravity, we can decompose it into the linear combination (superposition) of a force normal to an angled surface and a force tangential to the surface.

So, is gravity a single vertical vector or is it the linear combination of two other vectors? The answer is that at all times gravity has an infinite number of decompositions as a linear combination of any number of forces.

The same is true for the state of a particle. It is always a single state and a linear combination (superposition) of the states of any basis. Sometimes a state coincides with an important basis state (like an energy eigenstate) and that makes it physically special. But, it's still a superposition in any other basis other than that of the energy eigenstates.
 
Ok, but since time is relative to the observer then couldn't it still hold true that Now is the observation of the collapsed state? And is there anything to say that the probability doesn't change with each observation, giving definition to our personal pasts?
 
Rachel Lee Pierce said:
Ok, but since time is relative to the observer then couldn't it still hold true that Now is the observation of the collapsed state? And is there anything to say that the probability doesn't change with each observation, giving definition to our personal pasts?

If you're here to learn about QM then fine. If you want to impose your own woolly ideas on QM, then your thead will probably get locked.
 
PeroK said:
If you're here to learn about QM then fine. If you want to impose your own woolly ideas on QM, then your thead will probably get locked.
Great. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
9K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K