foodchain Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 Is the size of an atom in relation to say electron movement part of the reason we say wave particle duality. What I mean is electrons in an orbit are to move rather fast, and at the distances such objects are moving would it almost make time non existent? I mean to move a billionth of an inch at almost light speed for example. The amount of time there I think is my question, simply put if time for instance is basically an abstraction of material reality reacting for instance, well at such scales would not time also be different then say time for a massive star? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted November 29, 2007 Share Posted November 29, 2007 Electrons are not in orbits, they are in orbitals. How would it make time non-existent? If you are talking about relativity, then that isn't really the same thing... What do you mean wouldn't time be different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foodchain Posted November 29, 2007 Author Share Posted November 29, 2007 Electrons are not in orbits, they are in orbitals. How would it make time non-existent? If you are talking about relativity, then that isn't really the same thing... What do you mean wouldn't time be different? Well basically on the scale of human life it takes me so long to walk down a hallway physically. In the terms of atomic scales the movement of an electron at its speeds in those size dimensions. How would you track that, and would it not start to behave "weird" really in comparison to scales humans are normal with. For instance, it takes X in time for a comet to function in four dimensions, well what about an electron at atomic length scales? To cut down past even nano scale lengths of space with an object measured in what, angstroms? To be able to record the movement of such would involve time right? I mean if an electron is indeed moving in an electron cloud or what not around an atom, think about all the moment it could conduct at those scales or dimensions in even a fourth of a second, I just wonder if time itself changes also at that scale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Well basically on the scale of human life it takes me so long to walk down a hallway physically. In the terms of atomic scales the movement of an electron at its speeds in those size dimensions. How would you track that, and would it not start to behave "weird" really in comparison to scales humans are normal with. For instance, it takes X in time for a comet to function in four dimensions, well what about an electron at atomic length scales? To cut down past even nano scale lengths of space with an object measured in what, angstroms? To be able to record the movement of such would involve time right? I mean if an electron is indeed moving in an electron cloud or what not around an atom, think about all the moment it could conduct at those scales or dimensions in even a fourth of a second, I just wonder if time itself changes also at that scale. Atoms and their constituents are certainly subject to relativity. Electron state changes are one way we actually measure time and time intervals. The "weird" behavior is the orbital vs orbit distinction that Klaynos already mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foodchain Posted November 30, 2007 Author Share Posted November 30, 2007 Atoms and their constituents are certainly subject to relativity. Electron state changes are one way we actually measure time and time intervals. The "weird" behavior is the orbital vs orbit distinction that Klaynos already mentioned. Well some of this could easily be over my pay grade right now. I guess what is tweaking me in thought is at the scales at certain measurements of time the electron as I am trying to imagine such would I guess be everywhere at once, or in that you would have to get to such a small increment of time, in terms of being able to measure, to show it at a particular location. I mean if I had two mirrors say a trillionth of an inch apart, and I had a photon bounce back and fourth off of them, how would I know where the photon was at? That’s assuming the path of the photon stays on a trajectory that is exact from mirror one to mirror two. I am trying to imagine that such might lend itself to why we observe a wave function also, considering that an atom can become excited right, to a point in which it can "fire" off a photon in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted November 30, 2007 Share Posted November 30, 2007 Difficulty in localizing anything at that scale is more due to quantum mechanics — the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principle will prevent you from knowing where the particle is, but that's not based on time measurements being difficult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred56 Posted December 1, 2007 Share Posted December 1, 2007 Apparently the Heisenberg measurement limit has been reached (just recently). Also very small intervals of time become somewhat meaningless, but attosecond laser pulses are possible now too. Measuring actual time at that level is way too tricky, so they measure other things or 'ignore' the time variable. November 15, 2007 - A new application for entanglementMany very sensitive measuring devices (for instance used in imaging, remote sensing, astronomy and spectroscopy) are based on the interference between quantum particles, but have problems with disruption of the incredibly sensitive instruments by the particles themselves. Now a group of Australian researchers led by B. L. Higgins have made it possible to take measurements to the absolute limit thanks to using an entanglement-based approach originally devised for quantum computers. --www.popularscience.co.uk/features/feat19.htm and here's the paper:http://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.65.042313 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now