Problem of time

In theoretical physics, the problem of time is a conceptual conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics in that quantum mechanics regards the flow of time as universal and absolute, whereas general relativity regards the flow of time as malleable and relative.[1][2] This problem raises the question of what time really is in a physical sense and whether it is truly a real, distinct phenomenon. It also involves the related question of why time seems to flow in a single direction, despite the fact that no known physical laws at the microscopic level seem to require a single direction.[3] For macroscopic systems the directionality of time is directly linked to first principles such as the Second law of thermodynamics.

Time in quantum mechanics

In classical mechanics, a special status is assigned to time in the sense that it is treated as a classical background parameter, external to the system itself. This special role is seen in the standard formulation of quantum mechanics. It is regarded as part of an a priori given classical background with a well defined value. In fact, the classical treatment of time is deeply intertwined with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, and, thus, with the conceptual foundations of quantum theory: all measurements of observables are made at certain instants of time and probabilities are only assigned to such measurements.

Special relativity has modified the notion of time. But from a fixed Lorentz observer's viewpoint time remains a distinguished, absolute, external, global parameter. The Newtonian notion of time essentially carries over to special relativistic systems, hidden in the spacetime structure.

Overturning of absolute time in general relativity

Though classically spacetime appears to be an absolute background, general relativity reveals that spacetime is actually dynamical; gravity is a manifestation of spacetime geometry. Matter reacts with spacetime:

Spacetime tells matter how to move; matter tells spacetime how to curve.

— John Archibald Wheeler, Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam, p. 235[4]

Also, spacetime can interact with itself (e.g. gravitational waves). The dynamical nature of spacetime has a vast array of consequences.

The dynamical nature of spacetime, via the hole argument, implies that the theory is diffeomorphism invariant. The constraints are the imprint in the canonical theory of the diffeomorphism invariance of the four-dimensional theory. They also contain the dynamics of the theory, since the Hamiltonian identically vanishes. The quantum theory has no explicit dynamics; wavefunctions are annihilated by the constraints and Dirac observables commute with the constraints and hence are constants of motion. Kuchar introduces the idea of "perennials" and Rovelli the idea of "partial observables". The expectation is that in physical situations some of the variables of the theory will play the role of a "time" with respect to which other variables would evolve and define dynamics in a relational way. This runs into difficulties and is a version of the "problem of time" in the canonical quantization.[5]

Proposed solutions to the problem of time
Main article: Multiple histories

The quantum concept of time first emerged from early research on quantum gravity, in particular from the work of Bryce DeWitt in the 1960s:[6]

"Other times are just special cases of other universes."

In other words, time is an entanglement phenomenon, which places all equal clock readings (of correctly prepared clocks - or of any objects usable as clocks) into the same history. This was first understood by physicists Don Page and William Wootters in 1983.[7] They made a proposal to address the problem of time in systems like general relativity called conditional probabilities interpretation.[8] It consists in promoting all variables to quantum operators, one of them as a clock, and asking conditional probability questions with respect to other variables. They arrived at a solution based on the quantum phenomenon of entanglement. Page and Wootters showed how quantum entanglement can be used to measure time.[9]

In 2013, at the Istituto Nazionale di Ricerca Metrologica (INRIM) in Turin, Italy, Ekaterina Moreva, together with Giorgio Brida, Marco Gramegna, Vittorio Giovannetti, Lorenzo Maccone, and Marco Genovese performed the first experimental test of Page and Wootters' ideas. They confirmed that time is an emergent phenomenon for internal observers but absent for external observers of the universe just as the Wheeler–DeWitt equation predicts.[10][11][12]

Consistent discretizations approach developed by Jorge Pullin and Rodolfo Gambini have no constraints. These are lattice approximation techniques for quantum gravity. In the canonical approach if one discretizes the constraints and equations of motion, the resulting discrete equations are inconsistent: they cannot be solved simultaneously. To address this problem one uses a technique based on discretizing the action of the theory and working with the discrete equations of motion. These are automatically guaranteed to be consistent. Most of the hard conceptual questions of quantum gravity are related to the presence of constraints in the theory. Consistent discretized theories are free of these conceptual problems and can be straightforwardly quantized, providing a solution to the problem of time. It is a bit more subtle than this. Although without constraints and having "general evolution", the latter is only in terms of a discrete parameter that isn't physically accessible. The way out is addressed in a way similar to the Page–Wooters approach. The idea is to pick one of the physical variables to be a clock and asks relational questions. These ideas where the clock is also quantum mechanical have actually led to a new interpretation of quantum mechanics — the Montevideo interpretation of quantum mechanics.[13][14] This new interpretation solves the problems of the use of environmental decoherence as a solution to the problem of measurement in quantum mechanics by invoking fundamental limitations, due to the quantum mechanical nature of clocks, in the process of measurement in quantum mechanics. These limitations are very natural in the context of generally covariant theories as quantum gravity where the clock must be taken as one of the degrees of freedom of the system itself. They have also put forward this fundamental decoherence as a way to resolve the black hole information paradox.[15][16] In certain circumstances, a matter field is used to de-parametrize the theory and introduce a physical Hamiltonian. This generates physical time evolution, not a constraint.

Reduced phase space quantization constraints are solved first then quantized. This approach was considered for some time to be impossible as it seems to require first finding the general solution to Einstein's equations. However, with use of ideas involved in Dittrich's approximation scheme (built on ideas of Rovelli) a way to explicitly implement, at least in principle, a reduced phase space quantization was made viable.[17]

Avshalom Elitzur and Shahar Dolev argue that quantum mechanical experiments such as the Quantum Liar[18] provide evidence of inconsistent histories, and that spacetime itself may therefore be subject to change affecting entire histories.[19] Elitzur and Dolev also believe that an objective passage of time and relativity can be reconciled, and that it would resolve many of the issues with the block universe and the conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics.[20]

One solution to the problem of time proposed by Lee Smolin is that there exists a "thick present" of events, in which two events in the present can be causally related to each other, but in contrast to the block universe view of time in which all time exists eternally.[21] Marina Cortês and Lee Smolin argue that certain classes of discrete dynamical systems demonstrate time asymmetry and irreversibility, which is consistent with an objective passage of time.[22]

Weyl time in scale-invariant quantum gravity

Motivated by the Immirzi ambiguity in loop quantum gravity and the near conformal invariance of the standard model of elementary particles,[23] Charles Wang and co-workers have argued that the problem of time may be related to an underlying scale invariance of gravity-matter systems.[24][25][26] Scale invariance has also been proposed to resolve the hierarchy problem of fundamental couplings.[27] As a global continuous symmetry, scale invariance generates a conversed Weyl current[24][25] according to Noether’s theorem. In scale-invariant cosmological models, this Weyl current naturally gives rise to a harmonic time.[28] In the context of loop quantum gravity, Charles Wang et al suggest that scale invariance may lead to the existence of a quantized time.[24]

The thermal time hypothesis
Main articles: Thermal time hypothesis and thermodynamics

Generally covariant theories do not have a notion of a distinguished physical time with respect to which everything evolves. However, it is not needed for the full formulation and interpretation of the theory. The dynamical laws are determined by correlations which are sufficient to make predictions. But then a mechanism is needed which explains how the familiar notion of time eventually emerges from the timeless structure to become such an important ingredient of the macroscopic world we live in as well as of our conscious experience.

The thermal time hypothesis has been put forward as a possible solution to this problem by Carlo Rovelli and Alain Connes, both in classical and quantum theory. It postulates that physical time flow is not an a priori given fundamental property of the theory, but is a macroscopic feature of thermodynamical origin.[29]

References
  1. Isham, C. J. (1993), Ibort, L. A.; Rodríguez, M. A. (eds.), "Canonical Quantum Gravity and the Problem of Time", Integrable Systems, Quantum Groups, and Quantum Field Theories, NATO ASI Series, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 157–287, doi:10.1007/978-94-011-1980-1_6, ISBN 978-94-011-1980-1, retrieved 2021-01-04; http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9210011
  2. Wolchover, Natalie (December 1, 2016). "Quantum Gravity's Time Problem". Quanta Magazine.
  3. Folger, Tim (June 12, 2007). "Newsflash: Time May Not Exist". Discover.
  4. John Archibald Wheeler (18 June 2010). Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam: A Life in Physics. W. W. Norton. p. 235. ISBN 978-0-393-07948-7.
  5. K. Kuchar, in "Proceedings of the 4th Canadian meeting on Relativity and Relativistic Astrophysics", editors G. Kunstatter, D. Vincent, J. Williams, World Scientific, Singapore (1992).
  6. David Deutsch (14 April 2011). The Fabric of Reality. Penguin Books Limited. p. 240. ISBN 978-0-14-196961-9.
  7. Deutsch, David (2011). The Beginning of Infinity: Explanations that Transform The World. Penguin UK. p. 299. ISBN 9780141969695.
  8. Page, Don N.; Wootters, William K. (15 June 1983). "Evolution without evolution: Dynamics described by stationary observables". Phys. Rev. D. 27: 2885. Bibcode:1983PhRvD..27.2885P. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.27.2885.
  9. Aron, Jacob (October 25, 2013). "Entangled toy universe shows time may be an illusion". Archived from the original on 2016-10-18.
  10. "Quantum Experiment Shows How Time 'Emerges' from Entanglement". The Physics arXiv Blog. Oct 23, 2013. Archived from the original on 2017-06-03.
  11. Moreva, Ekaterina; Brida, Giorgio; Gramegna, Marco; Giovannetti, Vittorio; Maccone, Lorenzo; Genovese, Marco (20 May 2014). "Time from quantum entanglement: An experimental illustration". Physical Review A. 89 (5). arXiv:1310.4691. Bibcode:2014PhRvA..89e2122M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.89.052122.
  12. Moreva, Ekaterina; Gramegna, Marco; Brida, Giorgio; Maccone, Lorenzo; Genovese, Marco (16 November 2017). "Quantum time: Experimental multitime correlations". Physical Review D. 96 (5). arXiv:1710.00707. Bibcode:2017PhRvD..96j2005M. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.102005.
  13. Gambini, Rodolfo; Pullin, Jorge (1 June 2009). "The Montevideo interpretation of quantum mechanics: frequently asked questions". Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 174: 012003. arXiv:0905.4402. Bibcode:2009JPhCS.174a2003G. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/174/1/012003.
  14. Gambini, Rodolfo; Garc?a-Pintos, Luis Pedro; Pullin, Jorge (November 2011). "An axiomatic formulation of the Montevideo interpretation of quantum mechanics". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 42 (4): 256–263. arXiv:1002.4209. Bibcode:2011SHPMP..42..256G. doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2011.10.002.
  15. Gambini, Rodolfo; Porto, Rafael A.; Pullin, Jorge (December 2004). "No Black Hole Information Puzzle In A Relational Universe". International Journal of Modern Physics D. 13 (10): 2315–2320. arXiv:hep-th/0405183. Bibcode:2004IJMPD..13.2315G. doi:10.1142/S0218271804006383.
  16. Gambini, Rodolfo; Porto, Rafael A.; Pullin, Jorge (6 December 2004). "Realistic Clocks, Universal Decoherence, and the Black Hole Information Paradox". Physical Review Letters. 93 (24). arXiv:hep-th/0406260. Bibcode:2004PhRvL..93x0401G. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.240401.
  17. Thiemann, T (21 February 2006). "Reduced phase space quantization and Dirac observables". Classical and Quantum Gravity. 23 (4): 1163–1180. arXiv:gr-qc/0411031. Bibcode:2006CQGra..23.1163T. doi:10.1088/0264-9381/23/4/006.
  18. Elitzur, A. C., & Dolev, S. (2005). "Quantum phenomena within a new theory of time". In Quo vadis quantum mechanics? (pp. 325-349). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  19. Elitzur, A. C., & Dolev, S. (2003). "Is there more to T?. In The Nature of Time: Geometry, Physics and Perception (pp. 297-306). Springer, Dordrecht.
  20. Elitzur, A. C., & Dolev, S. (2005). "Becoming as a bridge between quantum mechanics and relativity". In Endophysics, Time, Quantum And The Subjective: (With CD-ROM) (pp. 589-606).
  21. Smolin, L (2015). "Temporal naturalism". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics. 52: 86–102. arXiv:1805.12468. doi:10.1016/j.shpsb.2015.03.005.
  22. Cortês, M.; Smolin, L. (2018). "Reversing the irreversible: from limit cycles to emergent time symmetry". Physical Review D. 97 (2): 026004. arXiv:1703.09696. doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.026004.
  23. "Conformal symmetry and the Standard Model". Physics Letters B. 648 (4): 312–317. 2007-05-10. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.03.023. ISSN 0370-2693.
  24. Wang, Charles H.-T.; Stankiewicz, Marcin (2020-01-10). "Quantization of time and the big bang via scale-invariant loop gravity". Physics Letters B. 800: 135106. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135106. ISSN 0370-2693.
  25. Wang, Charles H.-T.; Rodrigues, Daniel P. F. (2018-12-28). "Closing the gaps in quantum space and time: Conformally augmented gauge structure of gravitation". Physical Review D. 98 (12): 124041. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.124041. hdl:2164/11713.
  26. Wang, Charles H.-T. (2005-10-06). "Unambiguous spin-gauge formulation of canonical general relativity with conformorphism invariance". Physical Review D. 72 (8): 087501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.087501.
  27. Shaposhnikov, Mikhail; Shkerin, Andrey (2018-10-03). "Gravity, scale invariance and the hierarchy problem". Journal of High Energy Physics. 2018 (10): 24. doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)024. ISSN 1029-8479.
  28. Ferreira, Pedro G.; Hill, Christopher T.; Ross, Graham G. (2017-02-08). "Weyl current, scale-invariant inflation, and Planck scale generation". Physical Review D. 95 (4): 043507. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.043507.
  29. Connes, A; Rovelli, C (1 December 1994). "Von Neumann algebra automorphisms and time-thermodynamics relation in generally covariant quantum theories" (PDF). Classical and Quantum Gravity. 11 (12): 2899–2917. arXiv:gr-qc/9406019. Bibcode:1994CQGra..11.2899C. doi:10.1088/0264-9381/11/12/007.

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.