-1

From common knowledge we know that all massless particles move at the speed of light, is that right? If so, since they move at speed of light they don't experience time but particles with mass can't obtain speed of light (at most they can reach near the speed of light). Does this mean time is a manifestation or result of mass in some sense?

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
Madhurima Lahiri
  • 1
  • 2

3 Answers3

1

Not in any reasonable sense I can think of.

The amount of time that passed from one event to another depends entirely on the state of motion of the reference frame and mass is completely irrelevant to the question. Your idea works only with speed of light - this motion has no reference frame and thus no mass or time can be defined as they are defined wrt rest frame of the object. But this is caused by the fact that we define mass and time with reference to some frame that does not exist for massless particles, not because mass somehow creates time.

Umaxo
  • 5,818
1

The quick answer here is "no", but I think a more useful answer is to throw the question back at you and invite you to be more specific. As it stands it is very vague. To make it more specific, you would need to say in what way you are using the word "time" and how it relates to physical processes involving not just one entity but many entities.

Andrew Steane
  • 58,183
0

"Byproduct" is certainly not the right word, but there are indeed conceptual relationships between mass and time. For one thing, mass is a form of energy, and conservation of energy is related to the time translation symmetry. And of course, mass/energy distribution affects the curvature of spacetime (which is the phenomenon at the root of your question), which means the relationship extends to the nature of space, also.

But no notion/entity here can be considered simply as the byproduct of any other one. The full picture is much deeper, and not yet fully understood.

Stéphane Rollandin
  • 3,742
  • What is not fully understood? Do you have some resource one can read on these open questions? – Umaxo Oct 27 '20 at 10:49
  • Sorry, it is the other way round: if you feel there is no open question on the nature of spacetime, can you point to the resource that explains it all? – Stéphane Rollandin Oct 27 '20 at 19:20
  • I was not arguing, I was just asking question.And spacetime is differentiable manifold endowed with metric, orientation and so on. Seems to me as quite a clear picture, albeit I grant you there is some problem with incompletness theorems and math foundations. – Umaxo Oct 27 '20 at 19:28