Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Eugene Stefanovich <eugene_stefanovich@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 16:43:09 +0000 (UTC)
"Seratend" <ser_monmail@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1119689419.558161.274850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > In my view "symmetric handling" of time and space goes against the
> > fundamental structure of quantum mechanics. I don't see how
> > Minkowski space-time can be reconciled with quantum mechanics without
> > deep contradictions.
>
> What is, for you, the fundamental structure of QM?
In QM physical systems have certain observables (position, momentum,
spin, etc.) which are described by Hermitian operators in the formalism.
The measured values of observables depend on the state of the physical
system.
Time is very different in this respect. Time is "measured" by simply looking
at the clock. The value of time does not depend on the state of observed
physical system. This value does not depend on what system you are
observing.
You may not have any system to observe at all. Still you can "measure" time
by looking at the clock. That's why I say that time cannot be regarded as
a property of physical system. Time is not an observable in the
quantum-mechanical
sense of this word. Time is very different from position.
Eugene.
.
- References:
- Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Ali
- Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Seratend
- Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Eugene Stefanovich
- Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Seratend
- Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Eugene Stefanovich
- Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- From: Seratend
- Time, Parameter, Operator
- Prev by Date: Re: Small, slow AC machines: surface to volume ratio?
- Next by Date: Re: Time's Arrow
- Previous by thread: Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- Next by thread: Re: Time, Parameter, Operator
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|