Advertisement

Foundations of Physics

, Volume 18, Issue 12, pp 1159–1193 | Cite as

On the two aspects of time: The distinction and its implications

  • L. P. Horwitz
  • R. I. Arshansky
  • A. C. Elitzur
Part VI. Invited Papers Dedicated To David Bohm

Abstract

The contemporary view of the fundamental role of time in physics generally ignores its most obvious characteric, namely its flow. Studies in the foundations of relativistic mechanics during the past decade have shown that the dynamical evolution of a system can be treated in a manifestly covariant way, in terms of the solution of a system of canonical Hamilton type equations, by considering the space-time coordinates and momenta ofevents as its fundamental description. The evolution of the events, as functions of a universal invariant world, or historical, time, traces out the world lines that represent the phenomena (e.g., particles) which are observed in the laboratory. The positions in time of each of the events, i.e., the time of their potential detection, are, in this framework, controlled by this universal parameter τ, the time at which they are generated (and may proceed in the positive or negative sense). We find that the notion of thestate of a system requires generalization; at any given τ, it involves information about the system at timest(τ) ≠ τ. The correlation of what may be measured att(τ) with what is generated at τ is necessarily quite rigid, and is related covariantly to the spacelike correlations found in interference experiments. We find, furthermore, that interaction with Maxwell electromagnetism leads back to a static picture of the world, with no real evolution. As a consequence of this result, and the requirement of gauge invariance for the quantum mechanical evolution equation, we conclude that electromagnetism is described by a pre-Maxwell field, whose τ-integral (or asymptotic behavior as τ → ∞) may be identified with the Maxwell field. We therefore consider the world of events in space time, interacting through τ-dependent pre-Maxwell fields, as far as electrodynamics is concerned, as the objective dynamical reality. Our perception of the world, through laboratory detectors and our eyes, are based onintegration over τ over intervals sufficiently large to obtain an aposteriori description of the phenomena which coincides with the Maxwell theory. Fundamental notions, such as the conservation of charge, rest on this construction. The decomposition of the common notion of time into two essentially different aspects, one associated with an unvarying flow, and the second with direct observation subject to dynamical modification, has profound philosophical consequences, of which we are able to explore here only a few.

Keywords

World Line Static Picture Maxwell Theory Fundamental Notion Interference Experiment 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J. R. Fanchi,Phys. Rev. A 34, 4859 (1987).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    R. Landauer,Found. Phys. 16, 551 (1987); R. P. Feynman,Found. Phys. 16, 507 (1987).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Quoted in I. Prigogine,From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences (W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1980).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. C. W. Davies,The Physics of Time-Asymmetry (Surrey University Press, London, 1974).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. M. Zemach,Phil. Stud. 23, 68 (1972);Analysis 39, 143 (1979).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. P. Stapp,Found. Phys. 12, 363 (1982). See also, R. Penrose, “Singularities and time asymmetry,” in S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, eds.,General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1979), p. 581; G. J. Whitrow,The Natural Philosophy of Time (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Géhénniau and I. Prigogine,Found. Phys. 16, 437 (1986).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. J. Whitrow,The Natural Philosophy of Time (The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Papineau,Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 36, 273 (1985).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    H. P. Stapp, ——loc. cit.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. P. Horwitz and C. Piron,Helv. Phys. Acta 46, 316 (1973). See also, J. R. Fanchi and R. E. Collins,Found. Phys. 8, 851 (1978), and Ref. 34 for references to more recent work.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    I. Newton, as translated by Andrew Motte (1729), quoted in Max Born,Einstein's Theory of Relativity (Dover, New York, 1962), p. 57.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    S. Weinberg,Gravitation and Cosmology (Wiley, New York, 1972).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    F. Reuse,Found. Phys. 9, 865 (1979);Helv. Phys. Acta 53, 416 (1980).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. G. Bergmann,Introduction to the Theory of Relativity (Prentice-Hall, New York, 1942).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    E. C. G. Stueckelberg,Helv. Phys. Acta 14, 372, 588 (1941).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    V. A. Fock,Phys. Z. Sowjetunion 12, 404 (1937).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. P. Feynman,Phys. Rev. 80, 440 (1950). L. P. Horwitz and C. Piron,loc. cit., formulated the theory for more than one body.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    For example, C. Møller,The Theory of Relativity (The Clarendom Press, Oxford, 1952).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    I. Prigogine, Ref. 3.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    L. P. Horwitz and Y. Rabin,Lett. Nuovo Cimento 17, 501 (1976). See also Ref. 22.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    R. Arshansky, L. P. Horwitz, and Y. Lavie,Found. Phys. 13, 1167 (1983).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    P. Ehrenfest,Z. Phys. 45, 455 (1927).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L. P. Horwitz, C. Piron, and F. Reuse,Helv. Phys. Acta 48, 546 (1975); R. Arshansky and L. P. Horwitz,J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 15, L659 (1982).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    J. L. Synge,Classical Dynamics (Handbuch der Physik III) (Springer, Berlin, 1960), p. 212.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    E. C. G. Stueckelberg,Helv. Phys. Acta 15, 23 (1942).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    R. Kubo,Nuovo Cimento 85A, 293 (1985); L. Hostler,J. Math. Phys. 22, 2307 (1981).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    D. Saad, R. Arshansky, and L. P. Horwitz, to be published inFound. Phys. Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    J. Schwinger,Quantum Kinematics and Dynamics (W. A. Benjamin, New York, 1970).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    P. Horwich,Asymmetries in Time (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1987), where McTaggart (1908) is quoted. (We thank J. Rosen for bringing this work to our attention.) J. W. Dunne,The Serial Universe (Faber and Faber, London, 1934). (We thank Y. Mayer for bringing this work to our attention.)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    H. Weyl,Space, Time, Matter (Dover, New York, 1952).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    C. Piron,Foundations of Quantum Physics (W. A. Benjamin, Reading, Mass., 1976).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    G. Ludwig,Foundations of Quantum Mechanics I, II (Springer, New York, 1982, 1985).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    R. Arnshansky and L. P. Horwitz,Found. Phys. 15, 701 (1985). See also M. Usher, M.Sc. Thesis, Tel Aviv University, 1985.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Y. Nambu,Prog. Theor. Phys. 5, 82 (1950).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    R. Arshansky and L. P. Horwitz, Tel Aviv University preprints, TAUP 1467-86 and 1481-86, to be published inJour. Math. Phys. Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    L. P. Horwitz, S. Shashoua, and W. C. Schieve, Tel Aviv University preprint, TAUP 1408-85, to be published.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    J. A. Wheeler and R. P. Feynman,Rev. Mod. Phys. 21, 415 (1949).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    G. C. Hegerfeldt,Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2395 (1985). G. C. Hegerfeldt,Phys. Rev. D10, 3320 (1974).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    P. Havas,Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 1, 337 (1956).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    A. Einstein, B. Prodolsky, and N. Rosen,Phys. Rev. 48, 696 (1935).Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. A. Wheeler, “Frontiers of Time,” inProblems in the Foundations of Physics, N. Toraldo di Francia and Bas van Fraassen, eds. (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1979).Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    R. Arshansky and L. P. Horwitz, Tel Aviv University preprints, TAUP 1520-87, to be published inJour. Math. Phys., and R. Arnshansky, TAUP 1479-86, to be published.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    D. G. Currie, T. F. Jordan, and E. C. G. Sudarshan,Rev. Mod. Phys. 35, 350 (1963). See also H. Van Dam and E. P. Wigner,Phys. Rev. 142, 838 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. P. Horwitz
    • 1
  • R. I. Arshansky
    • 1
  • A. C. Elitzur
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Physics and Astronomy, Raymond and Beverly Sackler Faculty of Exact ScienceTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  2. 2.Department of Chemical PhysicsWeizmann Institute of ScienceRehovotIsrael

Personalised recommendations