
#1
Jan1613, 05:40 PM

P: 3

I thought about an idea that keeps spinning my head around. It's proven that the faster you move the slower the time passes for you and lets assume that speed of light is the limit. So if you had a spaceship that can travel at lets say 99.9% of speed of light wouldn't that be the same thing as what we call a teleportation? Because you would need to break after about 0.01s after your acceleration because time around you flies almost infinite times faster. And another thing  if you somehow manage to reach the maximum limit and travel at the speed of light, does that mean you become forever trapped in a single line of space (lets say space has no edge) for observers and die instantly from your perspective, because space once again shrinks to it's beginning point?
Sorry for mistakes, english is not my first language, and I registered to this forum just to ask what you think about this. :) 



#2
Jan1613, 06:34 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

What happens is that a clock moving sublight with respect to you runs slower than clocks stationary with respect to you. 



#3
Jan1813, 02:52 PM

P: 70

The following is a bit a of a long winded story I took from: http://www.costellospaceart.com/html..._of_light.html "Travelling at speeds close to the speed of light has a great effect for the travellers. You have probably heard or read that at these speeds, time slows down so much for the traveller that when the travellers return back to planet Earth, all their friends and everyone they knew are now greatly aged as many years have passed on Earth since they first took off on their journey. For the travellers, with their ship travelling at speeds close to the speed of light, time had slowed for them according to the clocks of the people who kept track of the ship on Earth. The travellers, according to the people on the Earth, had been on their journey for a thousand years. For the travellers, the trip seemed like they were gone a couple years. So, Bill and Mary synchronize their watches and then Mary takes off in her space ship and she travels at 99% the speed of light which is 669,600,000 miles an hour. Now for both Bill and Mary, time will seem to be passing at the same rate to each of them. Another way to put it is, let’s say that Mary and Bill are both 30 years old and we know that they are both going to pass away when they are 100 years old. If Bill spent the rest of his life on the Earth, the next 70 years would seem like 70 years to him, right? If Mary spent the rest of her life on her ship travelling close to the speed of light, the next 70 years would also to her seem like 70 years. Remember, time is relative to ones perspective. It’s when Bill and Mary meet again and they compare their watches that time dilation will show its face. In reality, thousands of years would pass between what Bill saw as 70 years and what Mary saw as 70 years. If Mary was travelling close to the speed of light and she travelled for one year according to her watch before returning to Earth, she would return to find that close to 20 years had passed on Earth. Also, Bill was no longer waiting for her. Relative to Mary, time had passed one year. It just took longer for that year to pass for Mary in her ship than it did for Bill on Earth. Even though 20 years had passed on Earth, for Mary in her ship, she saw only one year had passed because she was travelling much faster than Bill on Earth and time slowed down for her and time passed at a slower rate than it did for Bill." If this story is making little sense there is a lot of stuff in youtube about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSRIyDfo_mY this is another example regarding time dilation etc.. Richard Muller has a great series of conceptual physics lectures on there look for "physics for future presidents" on youtube or "Richard Muller Relativity" for lectures specifically on GR and SR: (to be honest if you are interested in this you are better of just watching the whole lectures) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNgzqpKZwhE (Relativity 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lf0Wrgairfw (Relativity 2) The lectures are from University California Berkeley, well worth a watch if you have no great mathematical knowledge but want to know about relativity, magnetism or most things physics. 



#4
Jan1813, 02:58 PM

P: 70

Is speed of light a teleportation? 



#5
Jan1813, 03:06 PM

P: 1,098

"What happens is that a clock moving sublight with respect to you runs slower than clocks stationary with respect to you." What he said about time dilation is right , however the title is a false premise as teleportation is with respect to matter. Other than that it is also right, to some degree; as in not being able to observe EM as it traverses spacetime (as opposed to teleportation which is "skipping" spacetime between events). 



#6
Jan1813, 03:27 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

What tends to happen is that people try to explain things like relativity in terms of more familiar classical mechanics. This does not work  all that happens is that the weirdness gets emphasized and the audience gets more confused. Why? That's easy: relativity is a superset of classical mechanics: it contains all of the classical motion and then adds stuff for things that are not explainable otherwise.
So when we try to give a lay impression of relativity, we need to be careful with our language to avoid misconceptions or being selfcontradictory. It didn't just seem to take a few years  it actually took a few years. To put it another way  it is equally correct to say that, to the people on the Earth is seemed to take thousands of years. It is quite accurate to say that Mary's year "appears" longer to Bill in the same way that lengths closer to you appear to stretch out more than lengths far from you. We can say that "distant lengths look short". It's got a special name: perspective. Lengths that are altered by perspective appear shorter. Special relativity says that relative speed alters perspective as well, and time also gets altered by perspective. Time periods that are altered by perspective appear longer. That one year for Bill also passes slowly for Mary  because Bill is moving in Mary's reference frame  and perspective works both ways. If Mary and Bill were a few hundred yards apart, then Mary would notice that Bill looks shorter than if they were standing next to each other ... for the same reason that Bill notices that Mary appears shorter. It is the same physics here only for time. To get a consistent understanding  have a look at: http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_intro.html ... it is in four parts and serves as a quick primer on the important aspects of special relativity that you tend to hear about and familiarizes the reader with the specialized language that goes with physics where time is another dimension of space. It also deals with the problems that must be overcome for FTL travel. (Note: the talk about perspective works from relativity to classical but not very well the other way around. i.e. a distant clock does not run slow like a distant length looks short ... recall: relativity replaces classical.) 



#7
Jan1813, 03:37 PM

P: 70





#8
Jan1813, 03:53 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

OP described the moving observer's time passing slower with respect to the moving observer. i.e. as you go faster, you see your watch tick slower. I wrote: It is possible that was not what was intended, but it is what was written down and it is a very common misunderstanding. It is a misunderstanding that gets reinforced by common descriptions of the Twin's Paradox. When someone is learning relativity, it avoids a lot of confusion if we are particular about the language we use. It is very easy to slip into a kind of shorthand and confuse people. Even the kind of care I'm advocating will have it's limitations  in the end, you have to explain and adopt the language of relativity. Please see the link in the previous post for clarification. 



#9
Jan1813, 04:03 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

The quoted section was a very good example of how confused impression can be set up and reinforced by wellmeaning attempts to describe the less intuitive parts of physics. I wouldn't be surprised if some parts of the videos repeat the error. You should see how badly I trip up sometimes :) (In fact  I tripped up in the comments by referring to you instead of "the author" as if these were your statements  apologies and corrected.) 



#10
Jan1813, 04:10 PM

P: 70





#11
Jan1813, 05:08 PM

P: 1,098

"It's proven that the faster you move the slower the time passes for you." This is not an overly complicated situation. It's a comparison of proper times in between accelerations..i.e. going faster. In that specific sentence they described a situation like the twin paradox, but as an only child . If you want to help clarify the OP thoughts, ask what is meant by "...you would need to break after about 0.01s after your acceleration because time around you flies almost infinite times faster." In that we'd see what the OP means by "time around you flies by faster." Or address the issue of even idealizing about going the speed of light. 



#12
Jan1813, 05:28 PM

Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 4,862





#13
Jan1813, 06:56 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

Either way  I'd expect OP to correct me if I misunderstood :)
@PAllen: thanks. @Mantas29: any of this any help to you? Welcome to PF BTW. 



#14
Jan1813, 07:37 PM

P: 13

I am going to take a different approach to your question. Light travels at the speed of light because it is relatively massless (or zero mass) relative to the SpaceTime continuum. Therefore for anything to travel as faster or faster than the speed of light, it would need to be able to dimensional transition between being mass conditions of positive and zero, and maybe even negative. So the problem with considering this a viable illusion of teleportation is one of warping the fabric of SpaceTime. Per the Equivalence Principle, it doesn't matter how you accelerate; you become a victim of your own increasing gravitational acceleration (and its not a pretty picture).




#15
Jan1813, 08:29 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

There is always the definition of "teleportation" of course.
Teleportation, in the common SF sense of repositioning something from one place to another instantly, without passing through the intervening space. I have seen it used to refer to quantum entanglement events where "information" is the thing "repositioned". I think the reference to everyone being infinitely timedilated in the speedoflight limit best refers to this kind of thing... translation in zero time. i.e. if light gets everywhere it's going in zero time on it's clock  is that teleportation? The answer each time is "no" because light also measures zero distance between positions. It no more teleports than you do when you go from sitting in your chair to sitting in your chair in the same instant. (... I have been pinged before about trying to talk in terms of the photonframe  it is not really all that helpful.) Not that dimension warps and FTL are not interesting. FTL could, in principle, (iirc  it's been a while) get you to the state where you arrive at your destination before you left (i.e. a causality violation ... unsolvable paradoxes ... fancy hypothetical spacetime geometries notwithstanding) I suppose that would be a kind of teleportation. Since you approach before you left, you could always go sublight to time your arrival to coincide with the propertime of your setting off from your origin. Which is where most of us break out the whiskey. Part IV of the last link I posted discusses these things in, what I hope people will find, more understandable terms. In light of the previous discussions  I think basically what all this means is "the first post needs clarification". 



#16
Jan1913, 02:20 AM

P: 13

Per your statment  "Teleportation, in the common SF sense of repositioning something from one place to another instantly, without passing through the intervening space." The concept of Time dilation still involves intervening space, or the relativity within the SpaceTime continuum.
In my opinion, true teleportation requires the disntegration of matter in one SpaceTime position and the reintegration of like matter in another SpaceTime position. So while speed of light travel is the illusion of teleportation, there are theoretical equivalences that show more promise. Quantum Teleportation, from a SF sense, provides a better vehicle for the sense of teleportation because it relies on quantum entaglement to allow the information of the disintegrated matter to be passed on for the reintegration of matter in a different SpaceTime position. However, even this procedure lack the mechanism for the actaul disintegration and reintegration process. 



#17
Jan1913, 02:32 AM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks ∞
PF Gold
P: 11,009

Yeah  most speculative teleportation schemes are duplication + destruction schemes.
It is usually unclear why there needs to be a destruction. This is getting highly speculative though. 



#18
Jan1913, 09:27 AM

P: 3




Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Momentum four vector of a particle and its speed as a fraction of the speed of light  Advanced Physics Homework  7  
Exceed speed of light: always exceeded speed of light?  Special & General Relativity  11  
What is the speed of light of a headlamp of a plane travelling at a speed of 1000km/s  General Physics  4  
Idea for light speed or possibly faster than light speed travel?  Quantum Physics  1  
Teleportation (new Danish experiment with light and cesium atoms)  Quantum Physics  5 