Slashdot Mirror


First Experimental Evidence That Time Is an Emergent Quantum Phenomenon

KentuckyFC writes "One of the great challenges in physics is to unite the theories of quantum mechanics and general relativity. But all attempts to do this all run into the famous 'problem of time' — the resulting equations describe a static universe in which nothing ever happens. In 1983, theoreticians showed how this could be solved if time is an emergent phenomenon based on entanglement, the phenomenon in which two quantum particles share the same existence. An external, god-like observer always sees no difference between these particles compared to an external objective clock. But an observer who measures one of the pair — and so becomes entangled with it--can immediately see how it evolves differently from its partner. So from the outside the universe appears static and unchanging, while objects that are entangled within it experience the maelstrom of change. Now quantum physicists have performed the first experimental test of this idea by measuring the evolution of a pair of entangled photons in two different ways. An external god-like observer sees no difference while an observer who measures one particle and becomes entangled with it does see the change. In other words, the experiment shows how time is an emergent phenomenon based on entanglement, in which case the contradiction between quantum mechanics and general relativity seems to melt away."

4 of 530 comments (clear)

  1. Instead of likening things to rocket science by sandytaru · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We need to start likening things to quantum physics. At this point rocket science is frikkin' easy compared to all this quantum stuff.

    Until quantum entangled particles gets harnessed into the faster than light communications they've talked about over the years, no one will really care anyway.

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  2. Re:god-like vs. measuring observer by lxs · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A god-like observer can observe without interacting. Back in reality every observation is an interaction.

  3. Re:Hmm by pz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If time is an emergent phenomenon, then how does the first event happen? If time does not yet exist, then there is no was to distinguish an event. By the parent's suggestion, time can only be propelled forward when already in motion, by the contribution of each new event. The very ideas of "first" and "new" presuppose the existence of time, and thus despite this likely significant scientific work, we continue to have a tautology until an instantiation somehow starts things off.

    We are still, also, a long way away from understanding what causes wavefunction collapse, since the notion of observation is clearly ludicrous: there are no observers in the center of the sun, or on the far side of Jupiter, as two minor examples.

    --

    Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
  4. Re:Hmm by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the Copenhagen interpretation, one would say that according to the entangled observer the "wavefunction has collapsed" whereas according to the unentangled observer, it hasn't.

    I prefer the Copenhagen interpretation, but this experiment is also interesting if we use the Many-Worlds interpretation. Then the God-like outside observer sees every possible quantum state and all of its outcomes simultaneously, as if they all have already happened. That sounds to me like a recipe for strict determinism.

    --
    Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.