A question of why time dilates and what is described by it

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DerringDerpy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of time dilation, questioning whether time is an objectively existing entity or merely a measure of change relative to a reference frame. Participants explore the underlying theories of time dilation, the implications of the speed of light, and the existence of a potential ether. The conversation includes conceptual inquiries into the relationship between time, space-time, and the mechanics of atomic processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether time is an objectively existing thing or simply a measure of change relative to a reference frame.
  • There is a proposal that time dilation could be explained by the mechanics of atomic processes, suggesting that the functioning of systems made of atoms slows down at higher speeds due to fewer repetitions of atomic movements.
  • One participant argues that the time dilation effect is a prediction of special relativity, which is well understood within that framework, and emphasizes the importance of understanding the theory itself.
  • Another viewpoint suggests that if the space-time continuum is merely a mathematical model, there should be theories explaining why the universe adheres to that model.
  • Some participants challenge the notion of electrons rotating around nuclei, suggesting that this classical analogy does not apply at quantum scales.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of high-speed travel on the perception of time and the functioning of clocks, with references to how different observers perceive time differently based on their relative velocities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of time and time dilation, with no consensus reached on whether time is an objective entity or a relative measure. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing perspectives on the underlying mechanics and implications of time dilation.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on classical interpretations of atomic behavior, which may not accurately reflect quantum mechanics. The discussion also highlights the complexity of reconciling subjective experiences of time with objective measurements across different frames of reference.

  • #31
Chris Miller said:
Wasn't suggesting it's "science" or doable, only trying to frame a thought experiment. Q: given I view your clock flashing slower, and you mine, whose does a 3rd frame's observer view as running slower?
And the answer is that it depends on the state of motion of the two of you relative to that observer.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Chris Miller
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
DerringDerpy said:
To use a metaphore, one can describe the Earth's orbit using pure math describing it as an ellipses. But that math alone can't tell you why Earth moves that way.

Agreed. But let's see where this takes us ...

Pure math won't reveal the existence of gravity in this, instead, you need to expand your view and start looking at other aspects of Earth and other celestial bodies, namely the sun, or have some other insight to figure out gravity. In this, gravity is part of why Earth has that orbit and not some other orbit.

Gravity can be used to explain why the orbit is an ellipse by pointing to two particular properties of gravity. One, that the force is directed towards the sun and two that the strength of the force is inversely proportional to the square of the distance to the sun.

So in one sense something is accomplished because we've used math to explain how ellipses follow from gravity. But in another sense we are no further along because we are still left with your original query. Namely, why does gravity have that particular direction and that particular dependence on distance to the sun. And we can go on with another explanation that uses math to explain how that follows from something deeper. But we are then still left with wondering why the deeper thing is true.

Likewise, relativity is the math of the result, it tells us how to predict things, but it doesn't tell us why things happen that way, and that is what I'm wondering.

Special relativity is more than just math. It's a complete explanation of, for example, time dilation. And it explains, using math, how time dilation follows from the two postulates.

So if you want to know why time dilates it's because of the two postulates: equivalence of inertial reference frames and invariance of light speed.

You are of course still left wondering why all reference frames are equivalent and why the speed of light is the same in all reference frames. Those things can be explained in terms of deeper reasons, but that has nothing to do with special relativity itself. Special relativity makes no attempt at explaining why the postulates are true, it simply explains how things will behave given the validity of the postulates. and it's the experimental verification of those conclusions that gives us faith in the validity of those postulates.

There is no known experiment you can perform to distinguish between a state of rest and a state of uniform motion. That seems to be a fundamental feature of our universe and the fact that time dilates is a consequence.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Hercuflea
  • #33
Chris Miller said:
Wasn't suggesting it's "science" or doable, only trying to frame a thought experiment.
Yes, but the problem is that framing actual physics scenarios using fiction is likely to lead you to misunderstandings and wrong answers. Best to stick with reality.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K