Quantum physics experiment leads to bizarre "negative time" phenomenon

zohaibahd

Posts: 525   +14
Staff
A real mind-melter: Quantum mechanics is strange, but even for a field of science that regularly defies our conventional understanding of reality, the latest discovery is particularly baffling. Researchers claim they have observed photons exhibiting a peculiar behavior, which they have described as "negative time."

The bizarre discovery, detailed in a study that has yet to be peer-reviewed, stems from an experiment in which photons were fired into a cloud of atoms cooled to just above absolute zero. In cases where the photons passed through without interacting, researchers found that the atoms were still briefly excited, as though the photons had been absorbed and re-emitted. Meanwhile, when the photons were absorbed, they seemed to reappear before the atoms could even become excited.

"A negative time delay may seem paradoxical, but what it means is that if you built a 'quantum' clock to measure how much time atoms are spending in the excited state, the clock hand would, under certain circumstances, move backward rather than forward," Josiah Sinclair of the University of Toronto explained to Scientific American. Sinclair's earlier work helped lay the foundation for the study.

So, what's really happening? When photons travel through a medium like the atom cloud, they can be absorbed, causing the atoms' electrons to jump to a higher energy level (excitation). The atoms then de-excite, re-emitting the photons' energy, which observers see as the light being delayed as it passes through.

The researchers were surprised to find no consensus on precisely what happens to individual photons during the delay process, so they conducted experiments to investigate further.

Based on those tests, they believe the phenomenon can be explained by the strange quantum effect known as "superposition" – the ability of quantum particles to exist in multiple states simultaneously.

From the perspective of the detector measuring the photons' journey, this quantum uncertainty allows the photons to register both positive and negative time values as they pass through the atom cloud. In this context, "negative time" appears to mean that photons seem to travel faster when the atoms are excited, compared to when they remain inactive.

While the findings don't change our broader understanding of time, they serve as a reminder that reality at the quantum level often defies our everyday intuitions.

In other recent quantum news, physicists have proposed an ingenious detector that could potentially allow us to observe graviton particles, thought to carry gravity's quantum forces. If successful, this breakthrough could unlock some of the universe's deepest mysteries.

Permalink to story:

 
In other news, the authors of the paper don't understand the English meaning of time. A propagation delay being shorter than expected is not negative time.
 
Similarly as bizarre as the fact that in a solid state crystal, electrons can behave as though they have negative mass, they accelerate in the direction opposite to the applied force. All due to quantum mechanics and the crystal structure.
 
In other news, the authors of the paper don't understand the English meaning of time. A propagation delay being shorter than expected is not negative time.
Not as such. When the amount of time it takes for the excitation cycle to happen is near instantaneous or even before it is to be expected, it implies a form if time discrepancy that seems negative in nature. Quantum physics is bizarre. Trying to translate that math into English is difficult at the best of times.
 
My layman's translation is this. What was expected to happen is 0) photon is emitted and one of two possibilities should happen {A}: 1) photon is absorbed, 2) atom is excited, 3) atom de-excites, 4) photon is emitted, 5) photon arrives at sensor. Or {B}: 1) photon is not absorbed, skip 2,3,4, 5) photon arrives at sensor.

Because steps 2, 3, 4 take a little bit of time, you expect that {A} takes longer than {B} but the measured result is that {B} takes longer than {A}. They don't understand why steps 2, 3, 4 seems to have a minus effect on the time to destination of the photon.
 
Not as such. When the amount of time it takes for the excitation cycle to happen is near instantaneous or even before it is to be expected, it implies a form if time discrepancy that seems negative in nature. Quantum physics is bizarre. Trying to translate that math into English is difficult at the best of times.
You are describing positive time still. A second is defined by how long it takes cesium-133 to oscillate 9,192,631,770 times from its ground state.

They mean to say some series of events happened in a different order than expected, all of which still occurred over a positive amount of time, but that doesn't generate as many clicks.
 
You are describing positive time still. A second is defined by how long it takes cesium-133 to oscillate 9,192,631,770 times from its ground state.

They mean to say some series of events happened in a different order than expected, all of which still occurred over a positive amount of time, but that doesn't generate as many clicks.
No I didn't, but it's ok that you didn't understand.
 
Last edited:
And yet even the paper's authors agreement with my viewpoint, but clearly you must know more than the authors themselves. "It took a positive amount of time" - Aephraim Steinberg
You're not following along. You also seem to have not understood what I said. Let's take a closer look.

Not as such. When the amount of time it takes for the excitation cycle to happen is near instantaneous or even before it is to be expected, it implies a form if time discrepancy that seems negative in nature. Quantum physics is bizarre. Trying to translate that math into English is difficult at the best of times.
Near instantaneous or before it's expected. That is what I said. I left out instantaneous because it was redundant, but let's include it for completeness sake.

What was being explained is that when an effect, ANY EFFECT, takes place near instantly, instantly or precedes a cause, we have examples of negative time.

Near instantly would mean that the effect began before the cause had time to complete. This is effectively negative time because the effect began early, meaning that the mechanism of the effect started before it was supposed to and the mechanism of cause had not yet finished.

Instantly means that the effect happens at the same time as the cause, which means that the effect started as the cause also began. This means that the mechanism of the effect happened side-by-side with the mechanism of the cause.

Before it's expected means that the effect preceded the cause, meaning that the mechanism of the effect took place BEFORE the mechanism of the cause.

All of these conditions are an indicator of negative time.

One could argue that my choice of words was less that ideal. Simultaneous likely would have been a better choice of vocabulary.

Can't put this in any simpler terms. If you don't get it, that's on you.
 
Funny how people in the comment field are now all Quantum Physics experts instead of just saying - «Hey…that was pretty cool, excited to see what else they discover»
 
Back