Relativity & Absolute Position: Exploring the Mysteries

  • I
  • Thread starter joshk
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Absolute
In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of relativity and how it suggests that as an object moves towards the speed of light, a greater amount of force is required to increase its velocity. It is explained that this is frame-dependent and there is no absolute inertial frame. The conversation also explores the possibility of accelerating an object to the speed of light relative to Earth, but it is noted that this is not possible due to the different measurements of time between frames.
  • #1
joshk
3
0
I am guessing this is an easy one to grasp, but I think I am missing something in my understanding of relativity.
Relativity suggests that as an object moves toward the speed of light, a greater amount of force is required to increase its velocity.
For this to be true, wouldn't it require the existence of absolute position?
For instance, when we say an object is approaching the speed of light, shouldn't this be relative to another inertial frame, such as an absolute inertial frame?
An apple is moving through space near the speed of light relative to the earth. If relativity is saying that a larger force (than predicted by Newtonian mechanics) is required to increase the velocity of the apple, then why wouldn't it be also be the case for a pear on Earth (who is also moving relative to the apple near the speed of light)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
joshk said:
For this to be true, wouldn't it require the existence of absolute position?

No, because speed and force are frame-dependent.

joshk said:
when we say an object is approaching the speed of light, shouldn't this be relative to another inertial frame

It's relative to some inertial frame, yes. But there will always be some other inertial frame in which the object is at rest. Speed is frame-dependent.

joshk said:
such as an absolute inertial frame?

There is no such thing.

joshk said:
An apple is moving through space near the speed of light relative to the earth. If relativity is saying that a larger force (than predicted by Newtonian mechanics) is required to increase the velocity of the apple, then why wouldn't it be also be the case for a pear on Earth (who is also moving relative to the apple near the speed of light)?

The force an observer on Earth would have to exert on the apple would be larger. But the force someone moving along with the apple would have to exert would not. And conversely, an observer on Earth would not have to exert more force on the pear, but an observer moving along with the apple would. Speed and force are frame-dependent.
 
  • Like
Likes joshk
  • #3
joshk said:
For instance, when we say an object is approaching the speed of light, shouldn't this be relative to another inertial frame
Yes it should. Also "a greater amount of force is required to increase its velocity" should read "a greater amount of force as measured in the frame in which the object is approaching the speed of light is required to increase its velocity".
joshk said:
If relativity is saying that a larger force (than predicted by Newtonian mechanics) is required to increase the velocity of the apple, then why wouldn't it be also be the case for a pear on Earth (who is also moving relative to the apple near the speed of light)?
Force is frame dependant. According to the pear's frame it requires more force to achieve the same coordinate acceleration of the apple as for the pear. According to the apple's frame, vice versa.
 
  • Like
Likes joshk
  • #4
thanks peter and ibix that clears up a lot!
I did suspect that would be the explanation for the last question. So if I could follow up, I get confused in that...
If the force to increase the speed of the apple as you move along with the apple is Newtonian, then wouldn't it be possible to actually get the velocity of the apple relative to Earth to the speed of light as long as someone (or something like a rocket) is traveling along with and pushing the apple?
 
  • #5
joshk said:
thanks peter and ibix that clears up a lot!
I did suspect that would be the explanation for the last question. So if I could follow up, I get confused in that...
If the force to increase the speed of the apple as you move along with the apple is Newtonian, then wouldn't it be possible to actually get the velocity of the apple relative to Earth to the speed of light as long as someone (or something like a rocket) is traveling along with and pushing the apple?
The problem is that someone in the spaceship measures time differently than someone on the Earth. So for example, if the ship is moving at 0.9c, it is perfectly possible for something in the rocket to be accelerated to 0.1c relative the the rocket as measured by someone in the rocket. However, someone on the Earth would only measure the object as being accelerated to 0.91743...c relative to the Earth.( and the object would only measure its velocity as being 0.91743...c relative to the Earth.)
 
  • Like
Likes joshk
  • #6
Janus said:
The problem is that someone in the spaceship measures time differently than someone on the Earth. So for example, if the ship is moving at 0.9c, it is perfectly possible for something in the rocket to be accelerated to 0.1c relative the the rocket as measured by someone in the rocket. However, someone on the Earth would only measure the object as being accelerated to 0.91743...c relative to the Earth.( and the object would only measure its velocity as being 0.91743...c relative to the Earth.)

thanks that makes perfect sense!
 

1. What is the theory of relativity?

The theory of relativity, proposed by Albert Einstein in the early 20th century, is a fundamental concept in physics that explains the relationship between space and time. It states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion, and that the speed of light in a vacuum is constant for all observers.

2. How does relativity impact our understanding of absolute position?

Relativity challenges the concept of absolute position, which states that there is a fixed and unchanging reference point in the universe. According to relativity, there is no such thing as absolute position because the position of an object is always relative to the observer and their frame of reference.

3. What is the difference between special relativity and general relativity?

Special relativity deals with the relationship between space and time in the absence of gravity, while general relativity extends this concept to include the effects of gravity. General relativity also includes the idea that gravity is not a force, but rather a curvature of spacetime caused by the presence of mass and energy.

4. How does the theory of relativity impact our daily lives?

The theory of relativity has many practical applications in modern technology, such as GPS systems, which rely on the precise timing of signals from satellites. It also plays a crucial role in our understanding of the universe, including the behavior of black holes and the expansion of the universe.

5. Are there any experiments that have confirmed the theory of relativity?

Yes, there have been numerous experiments over the years that have confirmed the predictions of the theory of relativity. One of the most famous is the observation of the bending of light by the sun during a solar eclipse, which was predicted by general relativity. Other experiments, such as the Hafele-Keating experiment and the Pound-Rebka experiment, have also provided evidence for the theory.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
119
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
808
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
590
Replies
130
Views
8K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
6
Views
276
Back
Top