1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

What is different about you in one place than you from another place?

  1. Dec 8, 2013 #1
    If you are the same as you are in a different place, then you are supposed to exist in both places at the same time by being the same. Since you do not exist in both places at the same time, what is different about you in this place in contrast to you in a different place?

    P.S. It should be than.
    than*
    Can the administrator remove this so I can post again to modify my title?
    Mod note: Done.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2013
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 8, 2013 #2
    Yes, the admin can remove your post, but I'm afraid you won't post it again then
     
  4. Dec 8, 2013 #3
    Point is, nothing is supposed to be at two different places at the same time.
     
  5. Dec 8, 2013 #4

    HallsofIvy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Why be "afraid"? It doesn't make sense as it is! What do you mean by "one place" or "another place"?
    Two feet apart? Two light years apart? At the same time of different times?

    And what do you mean by "different" or "same". If you were standing on the surface of Jupiter, the gravity would have reduced you height some! Is that what you mean by "different"? (Actually, you be dead- that's plenty "different"!)

    I have hunch you had some very nebulous "philosophical" interpretation of "different" in mind in which case this is not Physics at all.
     
  6. Dec 8, 2013 #5

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I don't follow your logic here. Why would being the same mean you are supposed to exist in multiple places at the same time?

    If the conditions are the same, then nothing is different about you other than you've changed locations.
     
  7. Dec 8, 2013 #6
    It is true that nothing is supposed to be at two points at the same time, but you are the same person at one place and also the same as you walk two steps ahead. If you remain exactly the same then you are supposed to exist at that place and the place two steps ahead of you, but you do not exist in both places at the same time. It does not mean that you become a different person when you walk two steps ahead. The question would be, what would be the difference between you and the you after taking two steps. It can be at the level of particles.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2013
  8. Dec 8, 2013 #7
    I find the logic of that last statement to be quite questionable.
     
  9. Dec 8, 2013 #8
    Space is that which separates particles. Time is that which allows particles to relocate in space.

    I hear you describing discrete time or discrete space. As if they were pixels, refreshing on a computer screen. In those cases your question asks what happens when you 'beam' from one location to another; one instant to another. How can one say you're still the same person if everyone is 'beaming' all the time?

    Well, it's hard to say that time or space are discrete. But even if they were, the complex internal configuration of a person is what seals their identity. Relocating shouldn't alter that identity irreversibly. Thus the person should not be altered.
     
  10. Dec 8, 2013 #9
    Even if the time is different, it still does not describe how it separates you from the you two steps ahead of you in terms of location. If you remain the same, how does the space knows where it is supposed to place you?
     
  11. Dec 8, 2013 #10

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I'm sorry, I have no idea what "remaining the same" has to do with this. And space doesn't "know" where to place you. You already exist and you are moving, changing position as time passes. But, this is only relative to other objects. You cannot measure your velocity relative to space because space isn't tangible.
     
  12. Dec 8, 2013 #11
    well fact is that you are not the same two feet after the place you stood before that.
    Every second your body ages even though in seconds the difference is so small noone can see it it still does happen so you are never the same , from that point of view no physical process or body can be directly copied or repeated, it cannot because even though you can make the macro look (fasade) look the same the inner things (atomic level stuff) will be different.

    Like restoring an old car , it may look just as it looked back then but the materials , the paint all that stuff is different , so in terms of physical bodies being the same there or here , I would say it' s a no.

    this actually has to do with relativity.
    space and time goes only one direction , you may travel back and forth in space and visit the same place over and over but time will still run one way, it may run faster or slower depending on the reference frame or speed your traveling but it still runs , so unless you become light (which has no mass) you can't stay the same both here and there after a while.
     
  13. Dec 8, 2013 #12

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    Please provide a scientific reference for this claim. It seems completely unjustified to me.
     
  14. Dec 8, 2013 #13

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Tell that to a fundamental particle.
     
  15. Dec 8, 2013 #14
    It is true that time only runs in one direction, but it does not keep track of the location. At any single point in time where the person's location would be still remains a question to me, but it seems like time is the only reasonable explanation as to the difference between the person at one place and the same person that took two steps away. I am just wondering if time keep tracks of the person's position since it flows through the three dimensional world.
     
  16. Dec 8, 2013 #15
    exactly , time is what seperates objects and events in space , just like a road is full of cars but if all of the cars that have ever been on that road would be there at once , we would see a pile of cars sacked one upon other , in other words an unreal situation.

    well time itself doesn't keep track of anything but you could look upon this as everywhere you have been you have interacted with that place , even though small but that changes something on the atomic level so that could be the trail you have left behind , the onl;y thing is it is impossible to tell , only at the macro level and even then.
    it's like sand , imagine being at the beach and making a sand castle , it will stay there for a while but as time goes many events take over and the castle is gone and after a significant period of time the beach would look just like it looked before you made the sand castle.
    traces tend to dissappear.
     
  17. Dec 8, 2013 #16

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Let me ask you this: do you feel like you are in two places at the same time very often?
     
  18. Dec 8, 2013 #17

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Time does not flow through anything. Space and time are part of "spacetime" and form the standard 4 dimensions we use. Which just means that it takes 4 numbers to give the location of anything in spacetime. Three for the location in space, and one for the location in time.
     
  19. Jan 13, 2014 #18
    If space is capable of separating particles, how does it separate the particle at one location from all the other possible locations it can be in at a given time?
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2014
  20. Jan 13, 2014 #19

    CWatters

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle

    Doesn't this make it impossible for two objects to be 100% identical?
     
  21. Jan 13, 2014 #20
    The object does not change when it relocates in space, so it should be identical to before it relocates. However, something is keeping it from appearing at all the other possible locations.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2014
  22. Jan 13, 2014 #21

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Is there a physics content to all this? If there is, you haven't brought up any.

    This thread is on a very short leash at the moment, so it better get to the punch line soon or it will be punched out!

    Zz.
     
  23. Jan 13, 2014 #22

    Drakkith

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Space separates particles in the sense that particles can occupy different positions as defined by some coordinate system. It doesn't mean that space is actively doing something.
     
  24. Jan 14, 2014 #23
    My question would be that since I do not appear at any other locations at the same time, the current me at this location must be unique from all the other possible appearances at other locations. For instance, if I draw two circles on a paper without overlapping each other and color the inside of the circles with blue color. If you ask where the blue color is, I would say it is in both of the circles. Now if I replace the circles with the boundary of my shape as to the possible locations that I can be in. It looks like I can be in both places at once, but in reality this is not the case. I say the color blue on both cases because I do not change even if I relocate to a different place. If you fill the other circle with a different color, then the color blue would only be in one of the circles. This means the other circle is no longer filled with blue color. The question would be, how would you set up a rule for the boundary to keep the same thing from existing at two possible locations? If I say you cannot exist in any other locations other than the location you are in, then as the example shows that clearly you have to fill the other circle with a different color besides blue. The thing is when I relocate to a different place, clearly I do not change, just as the color remains blue. As the example shows, now that you have blue color at two possible locations, it is not possible to isolate the color from one another with the rule where the blue color is. Clearly space has a way of separating myself in this location apart from other possible locations since I do not appear at two locations at once. I just do not know what boundary rule is applied to do that.

    I understand there is the saying that you cannot appear at two locations at once, I just thought this is interesting to present.

    I looked up Physics on Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics. I think I am still on topic.
     
  25. Jan 14, 2014 #24

    ZapperZ

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    You need to read up a bit on an aspect of quantum mechanics/statistical mechanics called "Indistinguishability". This concept gave birth to the Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein statistics of indistinguishable particles.

    Space doesn't "separate". It is a passive concept. I can have long-range coherence between electrons (such as what I have in a superconductor), and these electrons are still considered to be indistinguishable. the wave function allows them to be everywhere within that range simultaneously before a measurement.

    What you have a mixed up concept with here is the ABILITY to separate out such objects. Objects farther apart can be separated out easier than ones that are closer. By the time one gets to the microscopic level of QM where their wavefunction overlaps, then this can no longer be distinguished. Did the electron go through BOTH slits at the same time in a double-slit experiment?

    I still don't see this as having any physics content. It certainly lacks any supporting, published material that espouses the same idea that you are trying to push here. So this topic is teetering on personal, speculative theory in violation of our Rules.

    BTW, just so you know, it is bad form to show a physicist a Wikipedia definition of "physics". You might as well try to teach surgery to a surgeon.

    Zz.
     
  26. Jan 14, 2014 #25
    I do not have a generally accepted theory presented here. Please remove the post for me if needed.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2014
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook