(March 14, 2016 at 7:53 am)Alex K Wrote:(March 14, 2016 at 7:32 am)Panatheist Wrote: Are there any examples of when time intervals may become that short besides perhaps very near the initial event of the Big Bang?
It's not a question of time intervals becoming short (whatever that should mean). No need to go to the big bang, you can, at least hypothetically, ask the question how e.g. a particle reaction today proceeds between time "t" and time "t + planck time". If the difference in time you study is small enough, you run into this conceptual problem. For the description of everyday physics, the detailed goings-on at such short time steps might not be relevant because they average out, but since you ask the question about the *fundamental* nature of energy, you require us to consider nature to arbitrary, nay, infinite, precision and see whether we can still describe it - that's what the demand for a truly fundamental picture entails.
At the LHC, we are trying to move closer towards this unattainable goal: using higher and higher energy collisions, one can probe the laws of nature at ever shorter time scales because the collision energy is directly proportional to the frequency of the particle waves. However, the LHC does not reach near Energies where Planck time processes can be resolved. That's why it is a hypothetical endeavour for now to think about the breakdown of the concept of a continuous timeline.
Still, if you want to theoretically describe ever smaller steps in the evolution of a physical system, you run up against this barrier of Planck-Time steps, and that tells you that the *fundamental* description of nature might be more complicated than just having time flow continuously.
Okay, I cannot understand most of this, but I'm getting a glimpse of what I'm asking about. Does what you say here also imply that the supposed linear nature of time also breaks down at very short time intervals? (Does it make sense to ask if a segment of time is infinitely divisible?)
