Jump to content
reportingsjr

Whoa...

Recommended Posts

[W]hy when you go on a plane doesn't your watch go wrong because you have traveled either forward or backward in time?
It does go "wrong". The problem, however, is the difference is so tiny that it is unnoticeable. You'd have to have a much more elaborate and accurate time piece than a wrist watch to measure the effects of the time difference.EDIT: Here's a link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow, so you can actually travel forward or back in time, but why hwen you go on an aeroplane does your watch not be wrong appart from you being in a different time zone?
It may be that the amount of the difference in time is so small that you cannot detect it easily. If a person was to do a considerable amount of air travel in one year, and never set their watch the entire year, you might be able to detect a change after the year. If the speed of light is 670,616,629 mph, and a plane travels at around 530 mph, then time will change at a very small rate.But, the distinction needs to be made, you're not travelling forward or backward in time. Time is simply moving at two different rates for the traveller and the observer. The traveller does not travel forward in time, time just passes more slowly for him then for the observer. I'm not sure of the amounts, I'm having a hard time finding references to the experiments that produced these results.* good call on the link. I started typing this an hour ago and just hit Reply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
* good call on the link. I started typing this an hour ago and just hit Reply
Thanks. Good job adding "you're not travelling forward or backward in time" because I seemed to have forgotten to mention that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know it was a sort of trick question in that I've always been confounded by the time difference theories with regards to light speed.What I'm getting at is that if our observance of someone travelling at the speed of light is hugely different to the actual person travelling at the speed of light, then surely that also applies to our observance of the time it takes light to travel from the sun to earth.If our observation of the time it takes for light to get here is 8 minutes, then this is surely a distortion of the time it actually takes for the light particle to get here.
Actually, I believe that if you're traveling at the speed of light for 8 minutes, you've reached an infinite distance in relative terms to the person next to you, as all time stops around you. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I saw that was interesting is that the speed of light is always relative. Someone can never catch up to light. If a beam of light takes off, and someone starts chasing it at a speed approaching the speed of light (or at the speed of light), they will still see the light moving away from them at the speed of light. Even though an observer would see the beam of light and the traveller both moving at the same speed of light, the traveller would still see the beam of light moving away from them at the speed of light. So the speed of light is relative to whoever is observing it, it is not a speed limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One thing I saw that was interesting is that the speed of light is always relative. Someone can never catch up to light. If a beam of light takes off, and someone starts chasing it at a speed approaching the speed of light (or at the speed of light), they will still see the light moving away from them at the speed of light. Even though an observer would see the beam of light and the traveller both moving at the same speed of light, the traveller would still see the beam of light moving away from them at the speed of light. So the speed of light is relative to whoever is observing it, it is not a speed limit.
Yeah, it's hard to grasp. If a spaceship is crusing along at 99% of the speed of light and the captain turns on some headlights (or fires a laser), the light being emitted from those headlights (or the giant laser) would move away from the spaceship at the spead of light. Meanwhile, an observer watching this whole thing take place on a moon below would see the beam of light from the headlights traveling away from the spaceship also at the speed of light (rather than 1.99 times the speed of light).The difference in the two situations is how distance and time are measured. The observer on the planet would record much more time having elapsed than the captain in the spaceship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe any object would be able to sustain traveling at the speed of light. See when two cars traveling at say, 50km per hour crash into one and another the force of the impact is 100km per hour on both cars. Or if just one car at a 100km per hour crashes into say a tree, the force of impact on the tree and the car is 100km per hour. So, if you apply this to traveling at the speed of light, any object that the object traveling at the speed of light came into contact with – even a very small object such as pebble – would have very damaging effects. A Kleenex box traveling at 40km per hour can give a person a serious concussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one of the strange things about light - those cumulative effects do not apply to light. This is from the "Physics" section of the wikipedia page, where it gives the formula as well:

Most individuals are accustomed to the addition rule of velocities: if two cars approach each other from opposite directions, each travelling at a speed of 50 km/h, one expects that each car will perceive the other as approaching at a combined speed of 50 + 50 = 100 km/h to a very high degree of accuracy.At velocities at or approaching the speed of light, however, it becomes clear from experimental results that this rule does not apply. Two spaceships approaching each other, each travelling at 90% the speed of light relative to some third observer between them, do not perceive each other as approaching at 90% + 90% = 180% the speed of light; instead they each perceive the other as approaching at slightly less than 99.5% the speed of light.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light
A Kleenex box traveling at 40km per hour can give a person a serious concussion.
Given enough velocity, Kleenex boxes sitting in the back of people's cars have scalped the driver in a collision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A Kleenex box traveling at 40km per hour can give a person a serious concussion.
Actually, just to say it, that was disproved. Myth busters :), gotta love that show! But they did that one and all it did was hit the dummy, no damage at all. So I have to disagree with you! Light is fast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know that this isn't really a question about this topic, but it is similar, so anyway, why can anything only travel up to a certain speed, I think it is called the universal speed limit, what is stopping it? I think the number is something times ten to the power of something. Or something very similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The speed of light was thought to be the upper limit that things can move at, but some experiments show that not to be the case. Gravity and electrodynamic forces both move at speeds far greater then the speed of light. I believe the speed of light is thought to be the upper-limit for matter that is moving, because experiments have shown that as matter approaches the speed of light, it increases in mass. So, the energy required to have the object increase in mass gets so large that the object can't go any faster because it can't increase in mass. There's a brief discussion about that here:http://www.physlink.com/Education/AskExperts/ae91.cfm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The speed of light was thought to be the upper limit that things can move at, but some experiments show that not to be the case. Gravity and electrodynamic forces both move at speeds far greater then the speed of light.
Do you have a link that supports that? I'd be interested in reading it. I was under the impression that electromagnetism (i.e. light) travels at 3 x 10^8 m/s and nothing can travel faster than that. That is, unless you are entering the realm of quantum physics where things travel around all willy-nilly. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, but make sure your nerd hat is strapped on tightly:http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/gravity/speed_limit.aspHere is the short abstract:

General relativity has a geometric and a field interpretation. If angular momentum conservation is invoked in the geometric interpretation to explain experiments, the causality principle is violated. Meanwhile, the field interpretation avoids this problem by allowing faster-than-light propagation in forward time. Lightspeed is not a universal speed limit.
And the general abstract (note the last sentence):
The mathematical equations of general relativity are unique, but their physical interpretation is not. Confusion reigns over the difference between the field and geometric interpretations of GR, the meaning of gravitational force in a GR context, the distinction between gravitational waves and force variations, and the applicability of aberration to gravity. The geometric interpretation of GR, argued by Carlip, blurs these concepts. We show that aberration has been suppressed in the GR equations of motion through setting gravity’s propagation speed to infinity; and that the absence of aberration cannot be explained through some mathematical “cancellation” because that would cancel tidal forces too. The mere existence of Lorentzian relativity as an experimentally viable model for the relativity of motion nullifies the “proof” that nothing can propagate faster than light in forward time. Experiments indicate that gravity and electrodynamic forces both propagate far in excess of lightspeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But gravity and electrodynamic forces have no true speed, because the speed is unattainable. You try and figure out the speed you want. Also how do you figure out the speed of light? Its not matter or anything, did they have someone out in space look for a big light on earth and check what time they saw it, and check what time the people turned it on at? (or blew up or what have ya!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't need distances that large. They can shoot a laser several miles and, using computers, determine the fraction of time between the time the beam was emitted and the time when it struck the other end. Also, there are in fact particles of light (photons), but light is unique in that it exhibits the behaviors of both particles and waves.The force of gravity does have a speed, if a gigantic object instantly materialized at a point in space, gravity from that object would not instantly effect everything in the universe. It would take some time for the effects of the gravity to be felt, depending on the distance between the objects. And, speed is a measurement of distance vs. time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, I dont know about the gravity one! Where do you find this at again? Wikipedia and google you say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that this isn't really a question about this topic, but it is similar, so anyway, why can anything only travel up to a certain speed, I think it is called the universal speed limit, what is stopping it? I think the number is something times ten to the power of something. Or something very similar.
Just to tell you, "something times ten to the power of something" is called scientific form. It is used for astronomical calculations and just basically big numbers. For example, if you have the number:500,240,524,525,852,085In scientific form, it would be:.500240524525852085 x 10^18:)Well, at the speed of light, mass doesn't exist, so that's basically the universal speed limit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientific Notation :). BTW chocolate. I know your name *gasp*. :), its your secret weakness, like superman to kryptonite. :)You still never know!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Scientific Notation :). BTW chocolate. I know your name *gasp*. :), its your secret weakness, like superman to kryptonite. :)You still never know!
Now that is what I call random and oh yes, I knew it was called scientific form, I was just having a senior momnet and so I had to write it like that! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today or yesterday night NASA had a successful launch :). They launched the Discovery, I think. It's going to dock with the space station and they are going to install permanent wiring instead of the temporary wiring they have right now. Man! The Space Station just keeps progressing, soon people can live a board it forever :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today or yesterday night NASA had a successful launch :) . They launched the Discovery, I think. It's going to dock with the space station and they are going to install permanent wiring instead of the temporary wiring they have right now. Man! The Space Station just keeps progressing, soon people can live a board it forever :) .
Except for the fact that their muscles would turn to jello :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...