Timeline for If time isn't continuous, what is the best-known upper bound on the length of time intervals?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2014 at 18:39 | answer | added | DavePhD | timeline score: 7 | |
| Dec 23, 2013 at 2:06 | comment | added | Selene Routley | See for instance Lubos's answer to physics.stackexchange.com/a/9721/26076 : some pretty impressive lower bounds on discretisation lengths and times are seemingly motivated by recent observations. | |
| Dec 14, 2013 at 7:33 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackPhysics/status/411760720871952384 | ||
| Dec 12, 2013 at 7:24 | comment | added | user23660 | Take, for instance, numerical integration of DE. It is not enough to specify 'time step', one has to give at least the type of algorithm to make prediction as to how well it interpolates continuum model. The same should be true for discreteness (only in reverse): when will the physics start to exhibit the artifacts of underlying discreteness greatly depends on what type of discreteness it is and not just on time step. | |
| Dec 12, 2013 at 7:05 | comment | added | Brandon Enright | @user23660 no I don't have a model in mind. I do suppose there are different models for discrete time but I'm not sure what the various implications of them are. | |
| Dec 12, 2013 at 5:32 | comment | added | user23660 | I am assuming that the answer greatly depends on the model used for such discreteness. Do you have any particular models in mind? | |
| Dec 12, 2013 at 4:13 | comment | added | Brandon Enright | Related: physics.stackexchange.com/q/35674 | |
| Dec 12, 2013 at 4:13 | comment | added | Brandon Enright | It seems the light pulse may have been improved to 12 attoseconds: phys.org/news192909576.html | |
| Dec 12, 2013 at 4:11 | history | asked | Brandon Enright | CC BY-SA 3.0 |