Can We Confirm Concepts in Physics with CS Background?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter robert135
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around fundamental concepts in physics, particularly those related to the theory of relativity, the nature of light, and particle acceleration. Participants seek to clarify their understanding of these concepts through a series of yes or no questions, exploring both theoretical and practical aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that traveling close to the speed of light results in time dilation, while others challenge this by discussing the perspective of different inertial frames.
  • There is a discussion about Einstein's prediction regarding gravity as a distortion of spacetime, with differing interpretations of the Stress-Energy Tensor and its implications.
  • Participants agree that inertia is related to mass, though the nature of this relationship is discussed with some nuance.
  • It is noted that the speed of light in a vacuum is the upper limit, but light travels slower in various media, with some participants confirming this point.
  • There is a claim that particles have been accelerated to nearly the speed of light, with specific percentages mentioned, though the context of these measurements is debated.
  • Some participants argue that it is possible for particles to exceed the speed of light in a medium, while others contend that this is impossible, leading to a discussion on Cherenkov radiation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on several key concepts, particularly regarding time dilation, the nature of gravity, and the behavior of particles in relation to the speed of light in various media. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing interpretations present.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the definitions of terms like "speed of light" in different contexts, as well as the assumptions underlying relativistic effects and their reciprocal nature. Some mathematical steps and implications are also left unresolved.

robert135
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
My background is in CS, not physics, but I dabble a bit.

I am hoping to confirm a few things I have read and think that I understand. I am hoping these are easy questions. I will try to make them yes or no questions.

1) If one travels close to the speed of light, then time slows down?

2) Einstein predicted that gravity is just a distortion of spacetime?

3) The inertia of an object is related to its mass?

4) The speed of light through an object is slower than the speed of light in a vacuum?

5) We have successfully accelerated particles damn near the speed of light? If so how close?

6) We have accelerated particles faster than the slower speed of light through objects?


Thanks, I am looking many of these up as well.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
robert135 said:
My background is in CS, not physics, but I dabble a bit.

I am hoping to confirm a few things I have read and think that I understand. I am hoping these are easy questions. I will try to make them yes or no questions.

1) If one travels close to the speed of light, then time slows down?

This is not true, but would be appear to be the case from the intertial frame you're accelerating away from. In other words, you would seem to redshift to them, but from your perspective, they would appear to "speed up"

robert135 said:
2) Einstein predicted that gravity is just a distortion of spacetime?

I don't know what he predicted exactly, but the Stress-Energy Tensor describes gravity as a result of momentum, shear (stress), and density. In that sense, spacetime is what energy passes through, and the passage of that energy deforms spacetime from its initial configuration.

robert135 said:
3) The inertia of an object is related to its mass?

Well, yes, one is a measurement of the other.

robert135 said:
4) The speed of light through an object is slower than the speed of light in a vacuum?
Yes. The speed of light in vacuum is the upper limit of the speed of light, but not the ONLY speed it travels at in a given medium.

robert135 said:
5) We have successfully accelerated particles damn near the speed of light? If so how close?

Within a fractional percentage of c in that medium: around 99.99% at the ALICE accelerator. It should be noted that is a little deceptive however. The energies at which particles, atoms, etc collide is a better measure. That's why you hear talk of "GeV or TeV" and not "99.89 or 99.99999 %" outside of the media.

robert135 said:
6) We have accelerated particles faster than the slower speed of light through objects?

That would be impossible. You can change properties of a medium (other than vacuum) by doping it or other means, but the speed of light in a given homogeneous medium is the RULE. As for what happens when light "brakes" between mediums... do some reading on Čerenkov Radiation for an example.


robert135 said:
Thanks, I am looking many of these up as well.

Good questions, all of them are very good quetions.
 
robert135 said:
6) We have accelerated particles faster than the slower speed of light through objects?

Yes, if I understood your question correctly.
Light is slower in media (water, glass) (about 0.7c)
So particles can travel faster then 0.7c in glass. Of course, they travel slower then c.
In such cases particles emit Cherenkov's radiation.
 
5) We have successfully accelerated particles damn near the speed of light? If so how close?
At the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lep" , 99.999,999,998,793 %.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Frame Dragger said:
This is not true, but would be appear to be the case from the intertial frame you're accelerating away from. In other words, you would seem to redshift to them, but from your perspective, they would appear to "speed up"
I think you've got it wrong here, both of you would reciprocally observe the other one to slow down by the same factor if you were moving apart at constant speed (and both of you would see the other redshifted by the same factor)--it sounds like you're saying here that it's not reciprocal, that they see you slow down but you see them speed up? If so that's not correct, all relativistic effects must be reciprocal between different inertial observers or else the first postulate of relativity (saying the laws of physics work exactly the same in all inertial frames) would be violated...
Frame Dragger said:
That would be impossible. You can change properties of a medium (other than vacuum) by doping it or other means, but the speed of light in a given homogeneous medium is the RULE. As for what happens when light "brakes" between mediums... do some reading on Čerenkov Radiation for an example.
Not true, particles can travel through a medium faster than the speed of light in that medium (and light itself only appears slowed down because it's repeatedly being absorbed and reemitted, between absorption events it's traveling at the same speed it does in a vacuum--see ZapperZ's post #4 on the Physics Forum FAQ). Cherenkov radiation is a direct result of a particle traveling through a medium faster than light travels through that medium (see here for example), it's akin to the "sonic boom" that results when an object flies through air faster than the speed of sound.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K