What Are the Limitations and Possibilities of Measuring Time?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cheemaftw
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    quantized Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the limitations and possibilities of measuring time, exploring concepts such as the Planck time and length, the quantization of time, and the nature of time in relation to physical theories like relativity and quantum mechanics. Participants share various perspectives on whether time can be considered quantized and the implications of current scientific theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that time is only measurable relative to a progression or regression of something, proposing that the shortest measurable time is the Planck time, derived from the Planck length and the speed of light.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the Planck length as the shortest possible length, noting that without a theory of quantum gravity, the existence of a minimum length remains uncertain.
  • A different viewpoint argues against the quantization of time, suggesting that time is a human construct based on the observation of repetitive events, and that it does not necessarily follow the quantization seen in energy.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of Einstein's relativity, proposing that time may be perceived differently based on relative motion, and that time could be an illusion separate from energy and measurement.
  • There is mention of Julian Barbour's work on timelessness, indicating that some scientists are considering the idea that time itself may not be fundamental.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of mathematics in discussing physics, particularly in relation to concepts like the quantization of angular momentum and the nature of time in relativity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of time, with no consensus on whether time is quantized or if the Planck length is the shortest possible length. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing perspectives presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the lack of a theory of quantum gravity, which limits definitive conclusions about the nature of time and its measurement. There are also references to the complexity of concepts like global time in relativity and the relationship between time and physical processes.

  • #61
BrettJimison said:
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that when man arrived (whenever we did) we saw repetition as a way of keeping track of events. When did I say that repetition didn't exist before man started counting it? That's obviously nonsense!
I agree it is obviously nonsense. So I always have a hard time understanding why people like yourself make such obviously nonsensical statements.

If you have some repetitive physical phenomenon then each different repetition must differ in some physical quantity. That physical quantity exists regardless of man or how man might measure or label or describe it. The fact that man made a label ("time") and a device to measure it (clocks) and applied those man made labels and devices to that physical quantity does not mean that man made the physical quantity itself.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Meselwulf said:
What is the simplest vibration of energy? What makes temperatures? Can a system be a simple vibration?
Energy cannot vibrate. A system cannot be a vibration.

This is the most egregious case of a wikipedia education gone wrong that I have seen.
 
  • #63
An oscillator is synonymous to something vibrating - in fact, string theory deals with such cases where particles are simply vibrations of tiny particles we call strings.

This is physics 101.
 
  • #64
DaleSpam said:
If time may have existed before man then obviously time cannot be man made.

Duh.

They key word was ''If'' time existed before man. You don't need to state the obvious because nothing intelligible is being made of these.. discussions.

It goes deeper than that. Time may not exist before man because time is not an objective phenomena. However, there is plenty evidence to support the idea that time is subjective, man-made call it what you will, even biological explanations, who, another posters hear wouldn't even want to listen to ... and had the audacity to call me a lunatic.
 
  • #65
Jorriss said:
Energy cannot vibrate. A system cannot be a vibration.

This is the most egregious case of a wikipedia education gone wrong that I have seen.

Well you'd be wrong then, because what is an oscillator?
 
  • #66
time is not quantized because it is not an operator and therefore is not a dynamical variable.
 
  • #67
Meselwulf said:
An oscillator is synonymous to something vibrating - in fact, string theory deals with such cases where particles are simply vibrations of tiny particles we call strings.

This is physics 101.

...ok? Is there a reason you posted this?

Meselwulf said:
Duh.

They key word was ''If'' time existed before man. You don't need to state the obvious because nothing intelligible is being made of these.. discussions.

It goes deeper than that. Time may not exist before man because time is not an objective phenomena. However, there is plenty evidence to support the idea that time is subjective, man-made call it what you will, even biological explanations, who, another posters hear wouldn't even want to listen to ... and had the audacity to call me a lunatic.

For the second time, we are not discussing the subjective experience of passing time. We are discussing the physical property, the dimension, whatever you want to call it. The two concepts require completely different discussions, and we would make more of a mess out of this thread than it already is if we don't stick to one.

Meselwulf said:
Well you'd be wrong then, because what is an oscillator?

According to your earlier post, its a vibration. Which is only partly correct. And I don't see how Joriss is wrong. Energy cannot vibrate and a vibration in and of itself cannot be a system.
 
  • #68
chill_factor said:
time is not quantized because it is not an operator and therefore is not a dynamical variable.

In my opinion, you can't quantize which most likely doesn't exist, period.
 
  • #69
Drakkith said:
...ok? Is there a reason you posted this?



For the second time, we are not discussing the subjective experience of passing time. We are discussing the physical property, the dimension, whatever you want to call it. The two concepts require completely different discussions, and we would make more of a mess out of this thread than it already is if we don't stick to one.



According to your earlier post, its a vibration. Which is only partly correct. And I don't see how Joriss is wrong. Energy cannot vibrate and a vibration in and of itself cannot be a system.


Time is not physical.
 
  • #70
In the words of Julian Barbour...

''There is only change, there is no time.''
 
  • #71
Meselwulf, I'm reporting you and requesting that this thread be locked. You are obviously not here to do anything but argue with people and push your own opinion without attempting to understand anything.
 
  • #72
Of course energy can vibrate... this is common sense. And yes, energy is a system.
 
  • #73
Drakkith said:
Meselwulf, I'm reporting you and requesting that this thread be locked. You are obviously not here to do anything but argue with people and push your own opinion without attempting to understand anything.

Wrong, I have answered you in the best I can, it was you last night trying to cause the arguments.
 
  • #74
Meselwulf said:
Of course energy can vibrate... this is common sense. And yes, energy is a system.

Support your statement please. How can energy vibrate? What specifically is vibrating?
 
  • #75
Drakkith said:
Meselwulf, I'm reporting you and requesting that this thread be locked. You are obviously not here to do anything but argue with people and push your own opinion without attempting to understand anything.

I no... I am not ''pushing my opinion'' I am pushing the quantum physics. The physics I speak of is real and existing. I don't push any opinion.
 
  • #76
Drakkith said:
Support your statement please. How can energy vibrate? What specifically is vibrating?

What is a quantum harmonic oscillator... does an oscillator not vibrate?
 
  • #77
Meselwulf said:
What is a quantum harmonic oscillator... does an oscillator not vibrate?

It is a particle, or a system of particles. Not energy.
 
  • #78
Drakkith said:
It is a particle, or a system of particles. Not energy.

A Harmonic oscillator is a unit of energy. A unit can be a system in it's own right.
 
  • #79
Meselwulf said:
A Harmonic oscillator is a unit of energy. A unit can be a system in it's own right.

Explain how a "unit of energy" can oscillate. What is oscillating?
 
  • #80
Just define ''oscillation''... when you have you will see it is by definition a system which vibrates.
 
  • #81
Meselwulf said:
Just define ''oscillation''... when you have you will see it is by definition a system which vibrates.

Answer the question or get off the forums. What is oscillating when you claim that energy can oscillate?
 
  • #82
Thread locked pending moderation.
 

Similar threads

High School Thought experiment: Beyond the slowest measurable speed?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Undergrad Measurement accuracy or variation
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Graduate Is Planck Time and Length the Smallest Possible Units of Measurement?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Is Teleportation & Time Travel Possible?
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Undergrad How Do David and John Experience Proper Time Differently in Special Relativity?
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
High School Quantum Entanglement: Hidden Information vs. Time
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
High School What is the physical significance of mass-time-length equivalences in physics?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
High School Does Acceleration Affect Planck Lengths in General Relativity?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Undergrad Heisenberg Uncertainty vs Measurement Error
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
High School QFT & QM Questions (about time, locality, gravity, etc.)
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K