Does relativity imply alternate realities?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jeffceth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of relativity, particularly whether it suggests the existence of alternate realities. Participants explore scenarios involving relative motion at significant fractions of the speed of light and the resulting observations from different frames of reference. The conversation touches on concepts from both relativity and quantum mechanics, as well as the historical development of Einstein's theories.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the logical implications of relativity, suggesting that different perspectives on a collision could imply alternate realities.
  • Another participant clarifies that alternate realities are typically associated with quantum mechanics rather than general relativity, yet acknowledges that different observations can define different realities.
  • A participant expresses curiosity about the origins of Einstein's equations, questioning whether they were derived from data or had a solid mathematical basis.
  • Discussion includes the historical context of Einstein's preference for Maxwell's theory over Newtonian mechanics, leading to the development of relativity.
  • One participant raises the issue of whether relativistic effects have been observed in practical scenarios, noting that many effects are too small to detect at typical speeds.
  • Another participant references the tilt of Mercury's axis as a real-world verification of relativistic equations, though nuances of this situation remain unexplained.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the relationship between relativity and alternate realities, with no consensus reached on whether the scenarios discussed imply such realities. The discussion also reflects varying levels of understanding regarding the historical development of relativity and its implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge potential misunderstandings related to relativistic velocities and the implications of different frames of reference. There is also uncertainty regarding the practical observation of relativistic effects and the nuances of specific historical examples.

jeffceth
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
To anyone smarter than myself(which should be a lot of people here):

It's clear that relativity neccessitates that time, distance, or both vary according to one's perspective, or relative position. I ask what would happen in the following situation:

Relative to a third body, a body is moving through space at one half the speed of light(of course, relative to it is is not moving at all). Also relative to this third body, another body is moving at half the speed of light in the opposite direction, in fact, on a collision with the other body. Relative to each of the bodies, the other has obtained the speed of light and thus carries an infinite mass. When they collide, this will cause a different collision from the perspective of the third body than it wil from the perspective of either of the bodies. In my mind, this suggests alternate realities. Is this logical, or am I missing something here(I am 100% unversed in relativity, so this is the likely possibility)?

Also, if we were to add the fact the the third body, along the same direction of motion, is moving at half the speed of light relative to a fourth body, has one of the first bodies broken the speed of light(albeit only relative to the fourth body)?

I suspect that these questions arise out of my lack of knowledge, and I would appreciate being shown what concepts I am misunderstanding.

sincerely,
jeffceth
 
Physics news on Phys.org
thanks! that shows wherein lay mine error. On a related question, I have always wondered where einstein got all these equations from. Did he merely induce them from data sets, or did he have a solid mathmematical basis for them? I realize that some of them can be extrapolated/derived from others, but from whence came his first one?

sincerely,
jeffceth
 
Originally posted by jeffceth
When they collide, this will cause a different collision from the perspective of the third body than it wil from the perspective of either of the bodies. In my mind, this suggests alternate realities.

Alternate realities are generally the realm of quantum mechanics, and not general relativity. However, you are on the right track in your thinking that different observations define the different realities. If you look for material on the "Everett interpretation" or "Many-Worlds View", you'll see where the whole idea of parallel universes got started. Or, if you want to trace it back to its very earliest origins, you could look up the "Schrödinger's Cat" thought-experiment.
 


Originally posted by LURCH
Alternate realities are generally the realm of quantum mechanics, and not general relativity. However, you are on the right track in your thinking that different observations define the different realities. If you look for material on the "Everett interpretation" or "Many-Worlds View", you'll see where the whole idea of parallel universes got started. Or, if you want to trace it back to its very earliest origins, you could look up the "Schrödinger's Cat" thought-experiment.

thanks! I am familiar with the Schrödinger's cat thought-experiment and so forth, but it was my understanding that these considerations hypothesized rather than required 'alternate realities'. By contrast, my hypothetical situation would have neccessitated an alternate reality, though of course it was fatally flawed as I was not adding the velocities relativistically.

sincerely,
jeffceth
 
Originally posted by Ambitwistor
Einstein was a big fan of Maxwell's theory of electromagnetism. Maxwell's theory predicted that the speed of light had a certain constant value. But that theory was inconsistent with Newton's mechanics, which did not allow for the speed of something to be the same according to all inertial observers. Thus, most people thought that Maxwell's equations only worked in one frame (the "aether rest frame"), and that in other frames, the speed of light would be different from what Maxwell's equations predicted. Einstein preferred to toss out Newton's mechanics rather than Maxwell's electromagnetism, so he decided to look for a new mechanics in which Maxwell's equations (and thus the speed of light) would be the same in all inertial frames.

My curiosity would be as to if we have ever located or produced a situation in which bodies are moving fast enough(that is, relative to each other) for some of these implications to be observed. To my knowledge, at typical speeds the effects of many of einstein's equations are minute beyond the capability of our measuring systems to detect, or small enough at least to question any experimental conclusion. I read somewhere that the tilt of mercury's axis was a real-world verification of relativistic equations, but I have never had the nuances of that situation explained to me.


sincerely,
jeffceth
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
8K
  • · Replies 130 ·
5
Replies
130
Views
17K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K