Your example is unclear. Are you saying the atom went thru the wormhole or the photon?
On rereading it seems perfectly clear to me.
"it travels through a wormhole, in time to
arrive at another location where it absorbs the
same photon it emitted earlier." That must refer
to the atom.
Because it's not possible for time to not pass...if it's emitted, and then reabsorbed, time has passed between the emission and absorption even if it's immediately afterwards. It's not concurrent.
Yes, it is. No time passes for the photon. It does not exist in time.
Its emission and absorption are simultaneous in its own frame of reference.
The photon has to have been emitted before it can be absorbed.
No, if there were any interval of time between the emission and
absorption, the photon would travel at less that c, and it would
have a rest mass. Current physics says this doesn't occur. Of course,
the same thing was thought about the neutrino until recently,
however the neutrino never had the level of theoretical support
(Maxwell, etc) behind it that the photon does for the necessity
of its massless and timeless existence.
It would also require a wormhole that is approx the length of an atomic diameter if your intent is for the atom it left behind to suddenly be in front of it before it's had the chance to travel any measurable distance.
Huh? The atom can travel across the whole universe, then sit and wait
a few billion years. That has no effect on the photon, which doesn't
use time.
If I get in my car, back out of the driveway and then pull right back up I didn't go anywhere but I still left and returned and time passed. Obviously on a macro scale it takes more time, but it's the same principle.
Your car isn't a massless particle travelling at c, so the
rules are different.
