Particle Perspective: How Relativity Affects Us

In summary, the conversation covers a physics student's background and interest in attending graduate school for physics. They also discuss a physics documentary that mentions particles constantly "jumping" around and question the relevance of special and general relativity in this context. The conversation also delves into the concept of reference frames and quantum mechanics. The expert summarizer notes that the discussion is an oversimplified explanation of quantum mechanics and suggests starting a new thread for further discussion.
  • #1
Boltzman Oscillation
233
26
TL;DR Summary
Do particles see use as changing state like we see them changing state?
Some background, I am an undergraduate electrical engineering student with a knack for physics. I plan to attend graduate school for physics but for the meanwhile I've only taken an undergraduate course in QM mechanics, which used griffith's book, and a modern physics course, which covered some special relativity. Having said this, please understand that my erudition is minimum.
I remember watching a physics documentary, in it the narrator explains that particles are constantly "jumping" around. My guess is that this includes how electrons "jump" around from one state to another. From our point of view, the electron would be jumping around but in their point of view wouldn't we be the ones jumping around? Any insight is surely appreciated. Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you are a physics student, you should be able to rephrase your question in terms of reference frames and quantum mechanics.

I can't see the relevance to special and general relativity.
 
  • #3
Two ideas come to my mind for the case you stated.
#1 We humans are alive and have complex systems of seeing and consciousness. But the particles are not living creatures and are so simple that they have no such systems of observation.
#2 We humans have macro size bodies that classical mechanics describes the motion fair precisely. But the particles are usually micro size that quantum mechanics describes their motion.
So I am afraid the relativity or mutuality you suspected between human and particles does not hold.
 
  • #4
anuttarasammyak said:
Two ideas come to my mind for the case you stated.
#1 We humans are alive and have complex systems of seeing and consciousness. But the particles are not living creatures and are so simple that they have no such systems of observation.
#2 We humans have macro size bodies that classical mechanics describes the motion fair precisely. But the particles are usually micro size that quantum mechanics describes their motion.
So I am afraid the relativity or mutuality you suspected between human and particles does not hold.
Hmm I understand what you are saying. The first postulate of special relativity states that the laws of physics are the same in all intertial frames of reference. Would that mean that both motions would be described with the same laws? I think I know the answer but I would appreciate your input.
 
  • #5
Boltzman Oscillation said:
I remember watching a physics documentary, in it the narrator explains that particles are constantly "jumping" around. My guess is that this includes how electrons "jump" around from one state to another.
That's an overly simplified picture trying to convey to the general public what quantum mechanics would like like in classical terms. Reality is not like that at all.
 
  • #6
Boltzman Oscillation said:
I think I know the answer but I would appreciate your input.

For further discussion on the point #2 let us see classical mechanics of the solar system first. The most simple frame of reference says the Sun (more precisely the center of mass of the system) is at still and the Earth goes around it. In this Heliocentric system the laws of motions are written down in the simplest way. Also we can take another frame of reference saying the Earth is at still and the Sun goes around it. In this Geocentric system the laws of motion are more complex but anyway we are making use of it in our daily life.

As a similar case in quantum mechanics let us see hydrogen atom, i.e. an electron and a proton. The most familiar frame of reference says that the proton is at still and electron is moving around. In this orthodox system Schroedinger equation gives analytical solution of electron wave function. What happens if we take another frame of reference where electron is at still and the proton is moving around in analogy with Geocentric frame of reference in the previous paragraph ? It is not a IFR of course. There appears no electron cloud but proton cloud ? I have no idea whether QM behavior of the particle allows us to take the system of the other one is at still for electron and proton in hydrogen atom as we take for the Sun and the Earth.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
Boltzman Oscillation said:
Summary:: Do particles see use as changing state like we see them changing state?

I remember watching a physics documentary, in it the narrator explains that particles are constantly "jumping" around.

This has nothing to do with relativity; it's a (rather garbled) layman's description of quantum mechanics. If you want to ask about QM, please start a new thread in the QM forum.
 
  • #8
anuttarasammyak said:
Two ideas come to my mind for the case you stated.
#1 We humans are alive and have complex systems of seeing and consciousness. But the particles are not living creatures and are so simple that they have no such systems of observation.
#2 We humans have macro size bodies that classical mechanics describes the motion fair precisely. But the particles are usually micro size that quantum mechanics describes their motion.
So I am afraid the relativity or mutuality you suspected between human and particles does not hold.

None of this has anything to do with relativity.
 
  • #9
Boltzman Oscillation said:
The first postulate of special relativity states that the laws of physics are the same in all intertial frames of reference. Would that mean that both motions would be described with the same laws?

Obviously yes.
 
  • #10
anuttarasammyak said:
As a similar case in quantum mechanics

QM is off topic for this subforum.
 
  • #11
The topic of this thread does not appear to have anything to do with relativity. Thread closed.
 

1. What is the theory of relativity?

The theory of relativity is a scientific theory developed by Albert Einstein in the early 20th century. It describes the relationship between space and time, and how they are affected by the presence of matter and energy. There are two parts to the theory: special relativity, which deals with objects moving at a constant speed, and general relativity, which includes the effects of gravity.

2. How does relativity affect our daily lives?

Relativity has a significant impact on our daily lives, even though we may not always be aware of it. For example, GPS technology relies on the principles of relativity to accurately calculate locations and times. Additionally, the theory of relativity has led to advancements in fields such as astronomy, cosmology, and particle physics.

3. What is the connection between relativity and particles?

Relativity and particles are closely related because the theory of relativity helps us understand the behavior of particles at high speeds and in strong gravitational fields. It also explains how particles can have mass and energy at the same time, and how they can interact with each other through forces such as gravity.

4. How does relativity affect the concept of time?

According to the theory of relativity, time is not absolute and can be perceived differently by different observers. This is known as time dilation, and it occurs when an object is moving at high speeds or in a strong gravitational field. This effect has been confirmed by experiments and has important implications for space travel and the aging process.

5. What are some common misconceptions about relativity?

One common misconception about relativity is that it only applies to objects moving at very high speeds or in extreme conditions. In reality, the principles of relativity can be observed in everyday situations and are essential for understanding the behavior of matter and energy in our universe. Another misconception is that relativity has been proven wrong by newer theories, but in fact, it has been confirmed by numerous experiments and remains a fundamental part of modern physics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
67
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
2
Views
338
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
1
Views
993
Replies
1
Views
65
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
751
Back
Top