Within our comfortable world of causality we expect that reactions always follow an action and not vice versa. This why the recent chatter in the media about researchers having discovered ‘negative time’ with photons being emitted before the sample being hit by source photons created such a stir. Did these researchers truly just crack our fundamental concepts of (quantum) physics wide open? As it turns out, not really.
Much of the confusion stems from the fact that photons aren’t little marbles that bounce around the place, but are an expression of (electromagnetic) energy. This means that their resulting interaction with matter (i.e. groupings of atoms) is significantly more complicated, often resulting in the photonic energy getting absorbed by an atom, boosting the energy state of its electron(s) before possibly being re-emitted as the excited electrons decay into a lower orbit.
This dwell time before re-emission is what is confusing to many, as in our classical understanding we’d expect this to be a very deterministic process, while in a quantum world it most decidedly is not.
This is highlighted in the Scientific American article on the subject as well, specifically quantum probability. Within this system, it’s possible that there can be re-emissions before the atomic excitation has fully ceased. It was this original 2022 finding that was recently retested, with the findings confirmed.
As confusing as this all may sound, the authors of the recent paper stress that the core of the issue here is the so-called ‘group delay’ of the original pulse as it excites the cloud of rubidium atoms. If one were to think of this pulse as discrete quanta of photon particles, it’d seem to break causality, but as a wave function within quantum physics this is perfectly acceptable. Observations such as the rubidium atoms becoming excited despite photons passing through the cloud, and emitting a photon before the electrons returned to their ground state do not seem to make sense, but here we also have to consider how and what we are measuring.
The short version is that causality remains unbroken, and the world of quantum physics is intuitive in its own, strange ways. Research like this also gives us a much better fundamental understanding of photonics and related fields, none of which involve time travel.
Experimental setup and measured optical depth. (Credit: Josiah Sinclair et al., PRX Quantum, 2022)
Happy New Year Maya!
Goes back in time
Happy New Year 2024.
Happy new year 2026 .. why not?
Everything involves time travel. Just using only in one direction, and at nearly the speed of light.
Quantum Mechanics is very deterministic. The only question is what universe you are in after decoherence.
Guess the best analogy is you can have a stomp box that will with variable response.
Such that the signal coming out peaks before the single going in does.
Makes it seem the peak has travelled into the future. Of course it hasn’t.
That’s almost exactly what it is. The issue is defining what the “time” of something that’s “spread out” is.
It’s difficult because stuff like this gets reported and it’s so hard to correct since the language is specific.
You can’t, for instance, actually measure “when” the excitation happens and “when” the emissions happens because if you measure it excited… it won’t emit. So you’re really measuring ensemble behavior, which is how you get the “pulse shape behavior” bit.
Watching Sabine Hossenfelder’s YouTube video about this experiment made me feel that I understood it better than I could from perusing the links in the article: I recommend her work, highly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErLHm-1c6I4