Recent content by Albertgauss

Yes, looks like you're both correct. Below is a better image. Let's see if I got everything. I think I got that drawn correctly now. That's the trouble with trying not to cram everything together for a readable graphic. I wanted to keep things as clear as I could. But, yes, I agree, the ship...

Looking to see if I am in the ballpark correct about this. Let's say a spaceship flies at 99% the speed of light (B=0.99) to a planet 12 light years away. The spaceship is going to land on the planet once it arrives and stay put ever after. Ignore acceleration of start/stop. When it lands on the...

Who is the author(s) and maybe a jpeg image? There are, surprisingly, a whole bunch of books by that name. Plus, some of the books look expensive that have/contain that name, so if a reprint is available, that would be better.

I haven't found anything obvious about how rocket thrust gas particles would expand once they leave the thruster of the ship from which it is ejected. Inside the rocket would be the exploding gas, but outside the rocket the temperature would be ~ 3 Kelvin and zero pressure since outer space...

That works! So simple I missed it.

Whichever is simplest. I feel like there's got to be an easier/simpler way to say "moving radially towards the sun" or "out of the ecliptic plane" for instance. What would someone at NASA say if they were trying to move a satellite around the solar system? Yes, that looks to be the case. That...

Just looking for terminology here. If an object moves through the solar system, what is the simplest terminology that relates to how the object moves through the solar system? What are the words for if an object moves towards the sun (radially inwards) away from the sun (radially outwards)...

And just to make sure, PAllen's Equations on Monday night at 10:36 pm are the same (or nearly so) as the equations under discussion between Ibix and Odonriun Monday afternoon before? I don't remember these transformations for awhile and want to read up on them again. A website with a...

I thought about the responses here a little bit more. Here's what I came up with. Yes, the above is fine. The stars physically behind me and in front of me are rest with respect to each other. Me in my spaceship (frame) move such that those stars move with respect to me. The stars physically in...

I've not seen this statement before. Just to clarify: look at the blue dots I put in my image, let them be blue stars that are millions of light years in front of me but not "dead" in front of me but off the to the side a little. Certainly they are coming closer to me the more I travel towards...

Yes, but when the object physically ends up behind me and starts to redshift, do I perceive the object getting redder behind me or does it get redder in front of me in the searchlight cone?

The images below were taken from the website https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=ScienceClic+Alessandro+Roussel+What+would+we+see+at+the+speed+of+light%3f&mid=40C52E198C7F4F9D4EE240C52E198C7F4F9D4EE2&FORM=VIRE Starting at about min 11:30. Question: I know that objects that...

I think I'm good here and my question is answered pretty well. Other comments are certainly welcome, but I feel I understand what all has been said here and I appreciate everyone's efforts. All good on my end.

"Does this mean you are at rest in Frame 2 and moving at a constant relativistic speed relative to Frame 1? There is no such thing as "speed" without specifying what frame the speed is relative to." Yes, that is correct. But the important thing here is that in frame 1 the spot is at rest, in...

@PeterDonis , Let's try this. In Frame number 1 I am rest and there are two coordinates, the first coordinate I call my origin and the second coordinate where the object is, make it be a spot, or a point of light only--nothing with any structure. In this frame I measure the spot to be one...