Faster than the speed of light with only a fishing line

jamesbird
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Can someone easily explain to me what’s wrong with this thought experiment:
I’m in a spaceship traveling at 0.500001 c . I’ve a long fishing line with knots tied every 186k miles along it’s length (told you it was long). Another spaceship traveling at 0.500001 c in the opposite direction passes me, and at that moment I hook the line onto the other ship’s bumper (fender). The line now leaves the reel and as it passes through my fingers (I’m wearing gloves) I time that the knots are passing through my hand at more than 1 per second. Isn’t the line now moving at >c? If it’s not moving at c+ why not. Not bothering with those strange photon things that physicists come up with willy woolly explanations about, I’m using good old fashioned fishing line, something with (excuse the pun) real physical properties, real length etc.
Ha got you there Einstein – get out of that one.
Confused (or possibly just simple) of St Albans
 
Physics news on Phys.org
But the addition of velocity will not give a velocity >c, the relative velocity of the two space ships will be less than c and the fishing line will have velocity less than c also. Sorry but you should study special relativity a bit more :-)
 
jamesbird said:
Can someone easily explain to me what’s wrong with this thought experiment:
I’m in a spaceship traveling at 0.500001 c . I’ve a long fishing line with knots tied every 186k miles along it’s length (told you it was long). Another spaceship traveling at 0.500001 c in the opposite direction passes me, and at that moment I hook the line onto the other ship’s bumper (fender). The line now leaves the reel and as it passes through my fingers (I’m wearing gloves) I time that the knots are passing through my hand at more than 1 per second. Isn’t the line now moving at >c? If it’s not moving at c+ why not. Not bothering with those strange photon things that physicists come up with willy woolly explanations about, I’m using good old fashioned fishing line, something with (excuse the pun) real physical properties, real length etc.
Ha got you there Einstein – get out of that one.
Confused (or possibly just simple) of St Albans

With respect to what are you traveling at 0.500001c? Because you picked 0.500001c for both ships, it makes sense to say "with respect to the other ship", in which case you will have the knots passing you at 0.500001c.

But I don't think you mean that. You are implying that you have an absolute speed, but that won't work. If you pick a third observer, with respect to whom you have a velocity of 0.500001c and with respect to whom the other ship has a velocity of -5.00001c, then the relative speed of that other ship with respect to you is:

w = u - v / ( 1 - v/c . u/c)

w = (0.500001c + 0.500001c) / (1 - (0.500001)(-0.500001)) = 0.800001c

The knots will still hurt as they pass through your fingers though.

cheers,

neopolitan
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...

Similar threads

Back
Top