Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. Time dilation example

Time dilation example

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
questionhtmlcombeta-testingperformance
28 Posts 14 Posters 1 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • K KP Lee

    The problem with the time dilation examples are the inaccuracies in it make almost everything unknown. Where is the orbit relative to Earth? Once you get far enough out, the orbit with earth will lose to the orbit around the sun. How long does it take to get a three minute change in time? What's the mechanism for tracking time? If it is a grandfather clock movement, it will take 3 minutes in orbit to get a 3 minute time difference. If it is atomic resonance, I'd guess (WAG) it would take 3 million days to get 3 minutes difference in synchronous orbit. Being able to accelerate infinitely while reaching 99.9999999999% of the speed of light it would take 1.5 minutes out, reverse direction and 1.5 minutes back to get a 3 minute difference and it would have to have an incredibly strong machine to withstand the G forces and very fast computing to be able to tell when you are 1.5 light minutes away to stop and come back. If you went with it, you would be gelatinous goo when you get back. IE The web site doesn't do any real explaining of what is happening to cause the dilation or how long it takes to see that dilation.

    9 Offline
    9 Offline
    9082365
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    Quote:

    Being able to accelerate infinitely while reaching 99.9999999999% of the speed of light

    Er ... this and other self-contradictory statements suggest that you really haven't got to grips with this at all. Sorry!

    Quote:

    it make almost everything unknown

    But are they known unknowns or unknown unknowns?

    K 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • 9 9082365

      Scottish? Wow! People really are accent blind. I never believed it before! Brian Cox hails from Oldham in Lancashire. I've not been able to find a birthplace for Jeff Forshaw but has a similar accent though whether this has been acquired from working at Manchester University I cannot say. However they are both very much English. Northern English but definitively not Scottish!

      B Offline
      B Offline
      bleahy48
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Despite my confusion they are brilliant at explaining a very complex subject!

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K KP Lee

        The problem with the time dilation examples are the inaccuracies in it make almost everything unknown. Where is the orbit relative to Earth? Once you get far enough out, the orbit with earth will lose to the orbit around the sun. How long does it take to get a three minute change in time? What's the mechanism for tracking time? If it is a grandfather clock movement, it will take 3 minutes in orbit to get a 3 minute time difference. If it is atomic resonance, I'd guess (WAG) it would take 3 million days to get 3 minutes difference in synchronous orbit. Being able to accelerate infinitely while reaching 99.9999999999% of the speed of light it would take 1.5 minutes out, reverse direction and 1.5 minutes back to get a 3 minute difference and it would have to have an incredibly strong machine to withstand the G forces and very fast computing to be able to tell when you are 1.5 light minutes away to stop and come back. If you went with it, you would be gelatinous goo when you get back. IE The web site doesn't do any real explaining of what is happening to cause the dilation or how long it takes to see that dilation.

        B Offline
        B Offline
        bleahy48
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        You are really off base. This can be measured and has been. It's real. You are making the mistake of trying to relate relativity physics to your personal experience and common sense. Doesn't work.

        K 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • B bleahy48

          You are really off base. This can be measured and has been. It's real. You are making the mistake of trying to relate relativity physics to your personal experience and common sense. Doesn't work.

          K Offline
          K Offline
          KP Lee
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          Quantum physics seems full of self-contradictory statements. That's why I self-contradicted myself. The examples always have spaceships going near the speed of light without ever explaining how you got the ship moving that fast. Nor do they use the math needed because the ship is already moving that fast when you start measuring the time effects. Of course they have proof they are right. The great wizard of OZ knows all, just ignore the man you see behind the curtain. The theory of relativity was and still is a theory. Even though the light shifting effects of binary stars can be seen and measured as their orbital positions shift relative to us, we aren't seeing anything in space moving near the speed of light to us. The speed of light is about 300000000 m/s, Earth gravity is about 9.75 m/s^2. The time to reach the speed of light in "normal" physics accelerating at "Earth gravity" would approximately be 300000000/(9.75*3600*24) or about 356 days. You being in the space ship using quantum physics, the perceived time becomes less than the actual time so you need to slow the acceleration down to match perceived time. (You would start at a force of 2 Gs so the initial acceleration is 1 G away from earth and cut down on the force as you reach escape velocity.) This also ignores how your propelent can work since it is almost stationary as you near light speed. There isn't any way to reach the speed of light using quantum physics because as you near the speed of light, the power needed increases exponentially to maintain the perceived 1G acceleration until the power doesn't exist. I don't know the math to calculate it, but if you perceive one object from earth moving at 0.6 times the speed of light (SOL) in one direction and another moving at 0.6 SOL in the opposite direction, it appears like they are approaching at 1.2 times the SOL while each object sees the other object is moving at less than SOL towards them. (These "ships" should have view screens with stickers saying "objects you see are moving faster than they appear to be moving")

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • B bleahy48

            You are really off base. This can be measured and has been. It's real. You are making the mistake of trying to relate relativity physics to your personal experience and common sense. Doesn't work.

            K Offline
            K Offline
            KP Lee
            wrote on last edited by
            #25

            Should have said, "Other than light, we aren't seeing anything in space close to us, moving near the speed of light to us."

            B 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • K KP Lee

              Should have said, "Other than light, we aren't seeing anything in space close to us, moving near the speed of light to us."

              B Offline
              B Offline
              bleahy48
              wrote on last edited by
              #26

              From "Why Does e=mc^2 and Why Does It Matter?":

              In the late 1990s, the scientists at Brookhaven built a machine that produced beams of muons circulating around a 14-meter-diameter ring at a speed of 99.94 percent of the speed of light. If muons live for only 2.2 microseconds when they are speeding around the ring, then they would manage only 15 laps of the ring before they died. 4 In reality, they managed more like 400 laps, which means their lifetime is extended by a factor of 29 to just over 60 microseconds.

              Cox, Brian; Forshaw, Jeff (2009-07-14). Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?) (pp. 51-52). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

              and then this:

              We can therefore use our equation to predict by how much time should slow down when traveling at 99.94 percent of the speed of light, and therefore by how much a muon’s lifetime should be extended. Einstein predicts that the muons in Brookhaven should have their time stretched by a factor of γ = 1/ √ 1— υ2/ c2 with υ/ c = 0.9994. If you have a calculator handy, then type the numbers in and see what happens. Einstein’s formula gives 29, exactly as the Brookhaven experimenters found.

              Cox, Brian; Forshaw, Jeff (2009-07-14). Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?) (p. 52). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

              K 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B bleahy48

                From "Why Does e=mc^2 and Why Does It Matter?":

                In the late 1990s, the scientists at Brookhaven built a machine that produced beams of muons circulating around a 14-meter-diameter ring at a speed of 99.94 percent of the speed of light. If muons live for only 2.2 microseconds when they are speeding around the ring, then they would manage only 15 laps of the ring before they died. 4 In reality, they managed more like 400 laps, which means their lifetime is extended by a factor of 29 to just over 60 microseconds.

                Cox, Brian; Forshaw, Jeff (2009-07-14). Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?) (pp. 51-52). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

                and then this:

                We can therefore use our equation to predict by how much time should slow down when traveling at 99.94 percent of the speed of light, and therefore by how much a muon’s lifetime should be extended. Einstein predicts that the muons in Brookhaven should have their time stretched by a factor of γ = 1/ √ 1— υ2/ c2 with υ/ c = 0.9994. If you have a calculator handy, then type the numbers in and see what happens. Einstein’s formula gives 29, exactly as the Brookhaven experimenters found.

                Cox, Brian; Forshaw, Jeff (2009-07-14). Why Does E=mc2?: (And Why Should We Care?) (p. 52). Perseus Books Group. Kindle Edition.

                K Offline
                K Offline
                KP Lee
                wrote on last edited by
                #27

                The speed of light is 299792458 m/s, 299792458*0.9994~=299612582 14 m diameter is about 43.98 m circumference,distance traveled about 17592 m 17592/299612582 is about 5.872e-5 seconds or just under 60 microseconds. I'm surprised there is a measuring device accurate enough that it can count 400 loops being made on a 44 meter track in about 60 microseconds. I know muons is or is like a light emitting particle, so, how do you get it to stand still so you can measure the 2.2 microsecond lifespan it normally has when it isn't moving? Doesn't the Heisenberg principle apply when making these measurements? I can't help but think that running a car into a brick wall at 60 mph (m is miles here) would severely shorten the lifespan of the car. (wrong analogy if muons are normally stationary.)

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • 9 9082365

                  Quote:

                  Being able to accelerate infinitely while reaching 99.9999999999% of the speed of light

                  Er ... this and other self-contradictory statements suggest that you really haven't got to grips with this at all. Sorry!

                  Quote:

                  it make almost everything unknown

                  But are they known unknowns or unknown unknowns?

                  K Offline
                  K Offline
                  KP Lee
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #28

                  I'm contradictory? I intentionally made it that way because of the web link that synchronized two clocks and kept one on earth and installed the other one on a ship going nearly the speed of light. The web site certainly didn't explain how gravity or speed affects time. I believe gravity affects it because space around a heavy body is bent changing the speed light moves through space near a heavy body and that somehow affects time. I certainly don't know enough about it to properly explain how it all works, but I know enough to recognize when I see a poorly made example that doesn't really explain anything.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  Reply
                  • Reply as topic
                  Log in to reply
                  • Oldest to Newest
                  • Newest to Oldest
                  • Most Votes


                  • Login

                  • Don't have an account? Register

                  • Login or register to search.
                  • First post
                    Last post
                  0
                  • Categories
                  • Recent
                  • Tags
                  • Popular
                  • World
                  • Users
                  • Groups