# Is this really true or it's just science fiction?

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page
• 03-31-2002
golfinguy4
hmmm:

Speed= Dist. / Time

:D
• 03-31-2002
Nutshell
thats what i said.
• 03-31-2002
vasanth
I dont mean to say that time remains constant.. To put it in your way.. I mean that Your body will disintegrate at a faster rate in space.. Which is if you return back will be the same as others.. Consider this

if you travel at the speed of light outside space.. In terms of physics time is slow for you.. But your body would disintegrate at a higher speed... When you return back the disintegration will be the same as that of others on earth
• 04-01-2002
Nutshell
Is it possible to explain why time is slower if u travel at high speed in space?
• 04-01-2002
shtarker
Yes. . .well maby. . . .

I gave it a shot in this thread
• 04-01-2002
Betazep
>>>So Betazep, you're going to believe an uneducated skeptic who is too arrogant to admit he cannot understand the math and science behind Relativity?

Nope. Any other questions?
• 04-01-2002
Betazep
>>>They are seperate things, also, time is abstract.

Well according to Netwton, time is a constant. That is how I have always believed time to be. When executions happen at regular intervals on my computer, it is because time is constant.

According to relativity, time is not constant when in motion.... so would my clock ticks be different when I am flying at 3/4 lightspeed? Well they would in reference to an identical computer that is at 0 mph...

When I run a mile, I may feel younger, but I never expected to actually be younger. If I ran everywhere for my entire life, I would sense less time than a person that lays around for their entire life. That is of course unless I ran against the spin of the earth, which would proposedly slow down my motion in space, and would make me age faster.

So it is all a bit obscure for me, but I still believe it to be true.

Time isn't a constant.... it isn't a measurement... it isn't accurate: especially when you are moving....

guess we all have to live with that...

perhaps a meter isn't a meter as well.... why should spacial distance be a constant when our defined 'time' isn't a constant...?

And maybe everything doesn't taste like chicken, maybe we are the chicken....

Next time you are late for work... tell your boss that time doesn't matter because you are late due to dilation!!!
• 04-01-2002
vasanth
What is one second

The SI unit of time(1 second) is equal to the duration of 9 192 631 770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. Well consider that you wear a watch which works using the caesium 133 atom.

Now time in real sense will change when you travel at a higer speed(Speed of light).. But still the seconds ticking on the watch will be the same as on earth. Because the ocilation of the atom would be the same at any speed..

Sounds crazy when you think of relativity.. For example if you go out of the universe and watch the universe you will see the entire universe in different time frames... This theory is very usefull in complex calculations.. But note that there is nothink called the outside of the universe .. Everything is the universe.. Theory of relativity also works in the same fashion....
• 04-01-2002
Shiro
>I just odn't see why travelling at high speeds will be relative to
>the time. They are seperate things, also, time is abstract. You
>use time and speed to calculate the distance.

Not only high speeds, all speeds. But only when speeds are very high, you'll notice the effects of relativity. That's also the reason why classical mechanics (Galilei-Newton) works very well on earth situations. (Except physical experiments with high-energy and high-speed etc.) But the normal questions you'll get at school with moving cars, falling blocks etc. are well predicted by classical mechanics.

Classical mechanics is not false, relativity is just an addition to this theory.

Imagine your in a train which moves with speed V, as observed by an observer standing aside the railway. If a person in the train walks with speed U in the moving direction of the train, then you will measure the speed U. According to classical mechanics, the observer aside the railway will measure a speed W = V + U.

Now imagine that not a person is walking, but in the train someone turns a light on. A photon passes you with speed C (= speed of light). You will measure speed C. According to classical mechanics, the observer aside the railway will measure speed W = V + C!!

This is incorrect, photons travel with the speed of light which is a constant.

So speed is relative.

Imagine your in the train. You have a light at the bottom of the train and a mirror on the ceiling. If you put the light on, a photon travels to the ceiling and is returned by the mirror.

Assume the height of the train is H. Now the photon has travelled the distance 2 H. From your point of view.

But the train is moving. An observer aside the railway will measure a larger distance. Let me explain this with a simple graph:

Code:

``` M  M  M     / \   /    \  /      \ L    L  L 0  1  2```
L is the light, M is the mirror. At time = 0, the photon is launched. At time 1, it reaches the mirror. Note that the train has moved and to the observer aside the railway, also M has. M returns the photon at time 1. At time 2 the photon has returned.

So distance is relative.

Here you can see that if you move, distances will look shorter for you than someone who is in (relative) rest. This is called length-contraction.

Since the speed of light is constant, the observer along the railway will say: "The distance is larger, the speed of light is constant, so the time will be longer."

So, for you travelling in the train, the time is going slower.

Hope I made it a little clearer.
• 04-01-2002
vasanth
Hope betazep get the point
• 04-01-2002
Procyon
Quote:

Originally posted by vasanth
I dont mean to say that time remains constant.. To put it in your way.. I mean that Your body will disintegrate at a faster rate in space.. Which is if you return back will be the same as others.. Consider this

if you travel at the speed of light outside space.. In terms of physics time is slow for you.. But your body would disintegrate at a higher speed... When you return back the disintegration will be the same as that of others on earth
I understood what you meant, and you're completely wrong. When you return to Earth after a long journey at a very high speed your body will have aged much less than the bodies of everyone left on Earth: it will age the same amount as everything else in your ship, including your mind. Everything that reliably measures time - your consciousness, a cesium-based clock, the aging process - has to remain synchronized according to relativity if they travel together. Your body's rate of aging cannot somehow become detached from your conscious mind's rate of aging.
• 04-01-2002
vasanth
It is just that you guys dont understand the thory well... it is just that you are all watching a lot of sci fic movies... The theory means calculates time according to the speed you are travelling in.. In space there is no fixed point.... To make calculations easier you have to consider something as fixed.. but everything is in motion. So you use the theory of relativity to calculate the speed of light emited from planets etc..

Time , distance and spee d are three entire different entities.. That dosent mean that if you travel at the speed of light time will decrease...
• 04-01-2002
novacain
Time is not constant.
(There is no way eight hours at work is the same as eight hours at play.....)

If I managed to get close to the speed of light and my mass increased. Would the mass of fuel I have also increase?
Thus the energy derived from the fuel increase proportionally to the energy needed to propel the ship?
• 04-02-2002
vasanth
Not this:- When you are on different planets your mass id diffeent.. SO mass depends on gravity... And also note this energy can be neither created nor be destroyed.. So all your hyposis are wrong...
• 04-02-2002
novacain
>>When you are on different planets your mass id diffeent.. SO mass depends on gravity... And also note this energy can be neither created nor be destroyed..

Then e=mc^2 is not correct. As mass changes but energy can not. (provided the speed of light is independant of gravity)

>>SO mass depends on gravity
I thought
mass*accel = weight
(accel==gravity most of the time) but mass was constant even if weight changed.

A mole of petrol made at Earth standard gravity would produce more, less or same energy than one made at half Earth standard gravity.

What would happen to the mole of petrol if you took it between differing gravities? ie earth to moon? Would the energy output change?
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page