As yet, everything concerned with quanta is more or less mysterious,
although Heisenberg's theory has somewhat diminished the mystery. We
do not know whether quantum changes are really sudden or not; we do
not know whether the space concerned in atomic structure is continuous
or discrete. If electrons always moved in circles, as in the first
form of Bohr's theory, we could be content with a granular[Pg 361] discrete
space, and suppose that the intermediate orbits are geometrically
non-existent. But the existence of elliptic orbits in Sommerfeld's
development of the theory makes this difficult. And in atoms with many
planetary electrons, the paths of some are supposed to cross those of
others. In spite of these difficulties, however, I do not despair of
the hypothesis that space-time is discrete. The older quantum theory
uses the traditional conceptions of physics, and thinks of geometrical
orbits in a constant space. The Heisenberg theory, on the contrary,
has a completely new kinematics, according to which unquantized orbits
(if we may still speak of orbits) are geometrically impossible. It is
difficult, as yet, to translate this theory out of its technical form.
But even according to the older theory, one can see that a discrete
space-time is possible. For when we think of the matter in terms of
space-time, we realize that the geometry of the neighbourhood of the
atom may be different at different times. If an electron moves in
one sort of orbit at one time and in another at another, it does not
follow that each sort of orbit was geometrically possible at the time
when the other was being described. Perhaps it is not superfluous
to explain what is meant by saying that an orbit is "geometrically
possible" though not physically actual. What is meant is this: there is
a series of groups of events, each group being a point, and the series
being one in which all the intervals of points are time-like, and in
which, if a constant value is assigned to one of the co-ordinates, the
remaining three give a curve in a three-dimensional space having the
geometrical properties of the orbit in question. Whenever we speak of
an orbit geometrically, we are assuming that we can distinguish one
of the co-ordinates as "time," give it a constant value, and consider
the relations of the remaining three co-ordinates. Now it is always
possible that there may be a fallacy in this procedure, since it may be
that such geometrical relations as we are considering are[Pg 362] impossible
among "simultaneous" points. Moreover, in the general theory of
relativity, it may be impossible to distinguish one co-ordinate as more
representative of time than the others.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account