What is the rate of time dilation in relation to velocity?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jeebus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relative Time
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Einstein's theory of time dilation as it relates to special relativity, particularly through the lens of the twin paradox. The key takeaway is that when one twin travels at near-light speed, they experience time more slowly compared to the twin remaining on Earth. The formula for time dilation is T = t0 / sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2), where T is the time interval for the moving clock, t0 is the time interval for the stationary clock, v is the speed of relative motion, and c is the speed of light. Misunderstandings arise from the interpretation of relative motion, emphasizing that high velocities do not inherently slow time but rather affect how time is perceived by stationary observers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of special relativity
  • Familiarity with the twin paradox concept
  • Basic knowledge of mathematical functions and square roots
  • Comprehension of the speed of light as a constant (c)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of the Lorentz contraction formula: L = l0 * sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
  • Explore the twin paradox in depth through resources like the one provided by John Baez
  • Investigate the effects of time dilation at various velocities, particularly at 99.9% of the speed of light
  • Examine real-world applications of time dilation in GPS technology and particle physics
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators explaining special relativity, and anyone interested in the implications of high-velocity travel on time perception.

Jeebus
Messages
257
Reaction score
0
I am having some major issues grasping the concept of Einstein's proposed time dilation in respect to special relativity, specifically relative motion. I realize my questions are most likely due to a lack of my own understanding , and not a flaw in Einstein’s logic.

In using Einstein’s twins model, he says if one twin stayed on Earth, and the other was to travel at near the speed of light away from the Earth and then return, he (the traveling twin) would find his brother had aged much more rapidly than himself. The concept being that when traveling at high velocities your personal time slows.

So here is my question : Why is it that the twin on the rocket ship is the one moving? Isn’t the Earth moving away from the rocket ship just as fast as the rocket ship is moving away from the Earth? This would suggest to me an absolute motion principal, and not relative motion at all.

Lets break this down into a simpler hypothetical model. Let's say the two twins are both in rockets. The two rockets (and their contents), for the purpose of this model, are the only two objects in the universe. If one rocket starts it’s thrusters and zooms away at nearly the speed of light, it would have time dilation, and the other would not. If the moving twin cuts it’s engines, it would continue to drift away at a constant speed. So now what’s the difference between the two rockets and the two twins? We could assume either one to be motionless or traveling at great velocity according to relative motion, we just have to pick one.

Is there something I’m missing?

Problem 2

Using the same before mentioned principals, imagine a rocket traveling extremely close to the speed of light (lets say 95%). So an observer on Earth watches this rocket travel, and records the distance. According to the Earth observer, the rocket traveled .95 light years over the course of a year. If time is slower on the rocket than on Earth, due to the great velocity of the rocket, it has been less than a year to travel the distance of .95 light years. Let's say that time runs at a ratio of 3:4, on the rocket compared to the Earth. According to the rocket pilot the .95 light year trip only took .75 years. That means that he/she traveled at a rate faster than the speed of light.

So the question here is : what exactly is the rate of time dilation in relation to velocity?

Now to a degree this still irrelevant. Let's say the rocket is traveling at 99.9% the speed of light. It would only take a fraction of a percent to tip the scales over the speed of light in the perspective of the pilot.

---------------------------------------------
Time Dilation
T = time interval on clock in relative motion
t0 = time interval on clock at rest
v = speed of relative motion
c = speed of light

T = t0 / sqrroot(1-v^2/c^2)

Another useful formula is the one for the Lorentz Contraction (space along the direction traveled become shorter the closer you get to light):

l0 = length measured when object is at rest
L = length measured while in relative motion
v = speed of relative motion
c = speed of light

L = l0 * sqrroot(1-v^2/c^2)


T = 1 / sqrroot(1-0.95^2/1)
T = 1 / sqrroot(1-0.90)
T = 1 / sqrroot(.1)
T = 1 / .32

The astronaut covered the distances of .95 lightyears (as measured by the person on earth) in .31 years (as measured by himself...3 years as measured on earth).

Now, according to the astronaut, the lengh of his trip was:

L = l0 * sqrroot(1-v^2/c^2)
L = .95 * sqrroot(1-0.95^2/1)
L = .95 * sqrroot(.1)
L = .95 * .32
L = .3

So, according to the astronaut, he traveled .3 light years in in .31 years, or about 95% of the speed of light. According to the people on earth, he traveled .95 light years in 1 year, or about 95% of the speed of light.

Is that right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Jeebus
The concept being that when traveling at high velocities your personal time slows... If time is slower on the rocket than on Earth, due to the great velocity of the rocket
This is your fundamental misconception. High velocities do not make time slow down. High relative velocities make time pass more slowly as measured by a stationary observer.

The "twin paradox" you reference is thoroughly explained both on this site (do a search for "twin paradox") and on other sites all over the web. Here's a good one:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html

- Warren
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K