Change cannot happen at now

[psycho]

You couldn't have a change if cause and effect are simultaneous.

The effect begins when it begins and extends for as long as it lasts but cause and effect are contemporary. It is an interaction and both components must be contemporaneous.

You CANNOT have a change if the components of the interaction are not contemporary. If an interaction occurs between two elements of reality, these elements must interact at the same time.

No. Even in quantum field theory for matter, the cause comes before effect. That is correct since you cannot possibly have a change if they were simultaneous.

Could you give an example?

[bahman]

The effect begins when it begins and extends for as long as it lasts but cause and effect are contemporary. It is an interaction and both components must be contemporaneous.

You CANNOT have a change if the components of the interaction are not contemporary. If an interaction occurs between two elements of reality, these elements must interact at the same time.

No. Even in quantum field theory for matter, the cause comes before effect. That is correct since you cannot possibly have a change if they were simultaneous.

Could you give an example?

Example of what?

[psycho]

No. Even in quantum field theory for matter, the cause comes before effect. That is correct since you cannot possibly have a change if they were simultaneous.

Could you give an example?

Example of what?

A phenomenon in which one element of reality causes, previously, an effect on another element of reality.

[bahman]

Could you give an example?

Example of what?

A phenomenon in which one element of reality causes, previously, an effect on another element of reality.

Everywhere. An electron pushing another electron through the emission of a photon. It takes time that a photon to travel from the first electron to the second one. This applies to the other three forces too.

[psycho]

Example of what?

A phenomenon in which one element of reality causes, previously, an effect on another element of reality.

Everywhere. An electron pushing another electron through the emission of a photon. It takes time that a photon to travel from the first electron to the second one. This applies to the other three forces too.

You say that the interaction occurs between electron and electron or between electron and photon and then between photon and eletron?

[bahman]

A phenomenon in which one element of reality causes, previously, an effect on another element of reality.

Everywhere. An electron pushing another electron through the emission of a photon. It takes time that a photon to travel from the first electron to the second one. This applies to the other three forces too.

You say that the interaction occurs between electron and electron or between electron and photon and then between photon and eletron?

No. An electron emits/creates a photon. Then the photon moves. Another electron absorbs the photon then. This leads to the interaction of two electrons. There is however a duration between photon emission and absorption, while the photon was traveling.

[psycho]

Everywhere. An electron pushing another electron through the emission of a photon. It takes time that a photon to travel from the first electron to the second one. This applies to the other three forces too.

You say that the interaction occurs between electron and electron or between electron and photon and then between photon and eletron?

No. An electron emits/creates a photon. Then the photon moves. Another electron absorbs the photon then. This leads to the interaction of two electrons. There is however a duration between photon emission and absorption, while the photon was traveling.

You say that there is no instantaneous interaction between the photon and the electron in each case?

[bahman]

You say that the interaction occurs between electron and electron or between electron and photon and then between photon and eletron?

No. An electron emits/creates a photon. Then the photon moves. Another electron absorbs the photon then. This leads to the interaction of two electrons. There is however a duration between photon emission and absorption, while the photon was traveling.

You say that there is no instantaneous interaction between the photon and the electron in each case?

Yes.

[psycho]

No. An electron emits/creates a photon. Then the photon moves. Another electron absorbs the photon then. This leads to the interaction of two electrons. There is however a duration between photon emission and absorption, while the photon was traveling.

You say that there is no instantaneous interaction between the photon and the electron in each case?

Yes.

How long do you suppose it takes to become an interaction, the interaction between a photon and an electron?

And what is an interaction before being an interaction?

[bahman]

You say that there is no instantaneous interaction between the photon and the electron in each case?

Yes.

How long do you suppose it takes to become an interaction, the interaction between a photon and an electron?

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the interaction between two-electron. Photon is a packet so it takes time to creates a packet, the duration of the packet depends on the length of it. You can of course create a packet with size zero but for that, you need infinite energy.

And what is an interaction before being an interaction?

What do you mean?

[psycho]

Yes.

How long do you suppose it takes to become an interaction, the interaction between a photon and an electron?

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the interaction between two-electron. Photon is a packet so it takes time to creates a packet, the duration of the packet depends on the length of it. You can of course create a packet with size zero but for that, you need infinite energy.

And what is an interaction before being an interaction?

What do you mean?

Given the interaction between any two elements of reality. Because you suppose that the beginning the affection of one by the other does not happen in an instant (whatever you want to consider)? The affectation has to begin at the beginning. It is absurd to suppose that the beginning of something must have a temporary buffer before that beginning.

And why do you suppose that, given the case of an interaction between two elements, one must be considered a cause and the other an effect? Both are both cause and effect. Which one should I consider temporarily prior?

[bahman]

How long do you suppose it takes to become an interaction, the interaction between a photon and an electron?

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the interaction between two-electron. Photon is a packet so it takes time to creates a packet, the duration of the packet depends on the length of it. You can of course create a packet with size zero but for that, you need infinite energy.

And what is an interaction before being an interaction?

What do you mean?

Given the interaction between any two elements of reality. Because you suppose that the beginning the affection of one by the other does not happen in an instant (whatever you want to consider)? The affectation has to begin at the beginning. It is absurd to suppose that the beginning of something must have a temporary buffer before that beginning.

Yes, the beginning of the interaction between photon and electron is zero, then continuously increases then decreases as a photon is absorbed.

And why do you suppose that, given the case of an interaction between two elements, one must be considered a cause and the other an effect? Both are both cause and effect. Which one should I consider temporarily prior?

Well, you have to think of two elections as particles and the photon as media for interaction. The first electron causes and the second electron perceive afterward. And vise versa.

[psycho]

Sorry, I thought you were talking about the interaction between two-electron. Photon is a packet so it takes time to creates a packet, the duration of the packet depends on the length of it. You can of course create a packet with size zero but for that, you need infinite energy.


What do you mean?

Given the interaction between any two elements of reality. Because you suppose that the beginning the affection of one by the other does not happen in an instant (whatever you want to consider)? The affectation has to begin at the beginning. It is absurd to suppose that the beginning of something must have a temporary buffer before that beginning.

Yes, the beginning of the interaction between photon and electron is zero, then continuously increases then decreases as a photon is absorbed.

And why do you suppose that, given the case of an interaction between two elements, one must be considered a cause and the other an effect? Both are both cause and effect. Which one should I consider temporarily prior?

Well, you have to think of two elections as particles and the photon as media for interaction. The first electron causes and the second electron perceive afterward. And vise versa.

How long, you suppose, does it take for a photon to interact with an electron?

So, you do not consider that there are interactions between photons and electrons?

[bahman]

Given the interaction between any two elements of reality. Because you suppose that the beginning the affection of one by the other does not happen in an instant (whatever you want to consider)? The affectation has to begin at the beginning. It is absurd to suppose that the beginning of something must have a temporary buffer before that beginning.

Yes, the beginning of the interaction between photon and electron is zero, then continuously increases then decreases as a photon is absorbed.

And why do you suppose that, given the case of an interaction between two elements, one must be considered a cause and the other an effect? Both are both cause and effect. Which one should I consider temporarily prior?

Well, you have to think of two elections as particles and the photon as media for interaction. The first electron causes and the second electron perceive afterward. And vise versa.

How long, you suppose, does it take for a photon to interact with an electron?

So, you do not consider that there are interactions between photons and electrons?

As I said a photon is a packet. The process of interaction takes time and it is continuous.

[psycho]

Yes, the beginning of the interaction between photon and electron is zero, then continuously increases then decreases as a photon is absorbed.


Well, you have to think of two elections as particles and the photon as media for interaction. The first electron causes and the second electron perceive afterward. And vise versa.

How long, you suppose, does it take for a photon to interact with an electron?

So, you do not consider that there are interactions between photons and electrons?

As I said a photon is a packet. The process of interaction takes time and it is continuous.

Assuming that a photon takes time to create does not clarify why you consider that cause and effect have a temporal order where one precedes the other.

There must be a time when both electrons did not react to the presence of the other and at a given moment, both electrons affect each other. Why do you consider one of them to be first cause?