In quantum mechanics, superposition theory explains how an electron may occupy two distinct spatial coordinates concurrently. It seems to me that the implied assumption is that the quantum-level discontinuity is spatial. Why would it not be just as reasonable to assume the discontinuity resides on the temporal dimension, and that while the temporal relationship between location A and the observer, and location B and the observer is equivalent, that the temporal relationship between location A and B is not? In other words, from A with respect to B, the object does NOT exist at the same time. The temporal relationship between A and B may be other, complex, or non-existent? Any thoughts (and math!) to straighten me out?
2007-01-10 07:12:21 · 5 answers · asked by JON B 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
I don't think so, or you wouldn't get the result from the double slit experiment, which is observable with even a single photon. Time and space are not symmetric. There is not a temporal relationship between two points in space.
2007-01-10 10:43:05 · answer #1 · answered by Frank N 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would like to know what Assholides took me out of my cave.
We only observe electrons to be at two places at once. Two things in one place is impossible. Think of a volume of anything. It is static, does not move. Light would be impossible in such a frame. Now move an instance and everything falls apart. You see a flash and everything is as it was, plus a little energy minus the same energy used as movement. Try inverting both sides of the equation. Do not divide by something that is indivisible, like time. There is no such thing as 0, let alone zero time, when dividing or multiplying.
2007-01-18 01:54:49 · answer #2 · answered by mipsaction 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. the concept that your hand may have both position and momentum customary to 100% is contradictory. all of us understand there's a reduce, a reduce that grows smaller because the object is larger. with information from the time you get to a hand, you've honestly no clue about the guy molecules, yet you've a good idea about "averages" of surfaces. The ideas of highschool physics use non-deformable solids, yet discuss self-interference (aka. "diffraction"). "Quantum superposition" is presently operating up hostile on your unused good judgment circuits, and asking you to *imagine*. to study something new. with information from the way, "not transferring" continues to be transferring, with a cost of 0 on your body...
2016-12-02 02:29:27 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In relativistic QM these things are sorted out.
But in the end, one reference frame is as good as another and so, from a reference frame that shows "superposition in space" you will get the same results (physics) as from a frame that shows a superposition in time.
2007-01-10 09:10:33 · answer #4 · answered by bubsir 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
quantum physics freaks me out.
2007-01-10 08:09:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋