Confused about time slowing down

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MrXavia
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confused Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of time dilation as described in the context of the "twins paradox," exploring the implications of relative motion and acceleration on the passage of time. Participants express confusion regarding how time is perceived differently by observers in different frames of reference, particularly when one observer accelerates while the other remains stationary.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on how time slows down with speed and questions the validity of different reference frames in the context of two probes with synchronized clocks.
  • Another participant identifies the scenario as the "twins paradox" and suggests looking into existing resources for further understanding.
  • Several participants argue that the symmetry of the situation is broken by acceleration, which complicates the application of special relativity, leading to different elapsed times on the clocks.
  • There is a contention regarding whether time dilation is solely a result of acceleration or if relative velocity also plays a role, with some asserting that both factors contribute to the phenomenon.
  • A participant proposes a thought experiment that avoids acceleration or deceleration to illustrate the age difference between two individuals after a journey, prompting further discussion on the feasibility of such a scenario.
  • Another participant emphasizes that a clock measures the proper time along its path in spacetime, suggesting a different perspective on understanding time dilation.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of relative velocity on simultaneity and how it affects the rates at which clocks run in different frames.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the causes of time dilation, with some asserting that both acceleration and relative velocity contribute, while others maintain that acceleration is the primary factor. The discussion remains unresolved as participants explore different viewpoints and thought experiments.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the complexities of applying special relativity to non-inertial frames and the implications of acceleration on time dilation, indicating that the discussion involves nuanced interpretations of relativistic effects.

  • #31
Janus said:
Again, this is only true for someone at rest with respect to Earth and Planet X.

This will not be true as far as the Traveler is concerned. Remember, the speed of light is a constant relative to any inertial frame. Thus according for the traveler, the two signals travel at c relative to him (not Earth and Planet X). Thus Earth is fleeing away from its signal and Planet X is rushing towards its signal. Planet X gets its signal first, and its clock starts running from the Agreed upon starting value first. By the time that Earth has gotten its signal, quite a bit of time has already past on Planet X.

That doesn't make sense to me at all. Let's forget a traveler for the moment. I can visualize a clock on Earth and a clock on Planet X being set in sync simply by having simultaneous signals sent from a THIRD planet that is equidistant from both Earth and Planet X. Forgetting travelers, forgetting relativity, forgetting everything, I can do that! Surely, you will allow that scenario.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
LBrandt said:
That doesn't make sense to me at all. Let's forget a traveler for the moment. I can visualize a clock on Earth and a clock on Planet X being set in sync simply by having simultaneous signals sent from a THIRD planet that is equidistant from both Earth and Planet X. Forgetting travelers, forgetting relativity, forgetting everything, I can do that! Surely, you will allow that scenario.

If you forget relativity then your question is no longer meaningful! You can add an infinite array of intermediate planets, and your "difference" will become smaller and smaller at each step, but it's never eliminated. What you would require is that light not be the upper 'speed limit' at work, and have a means to send signals faster than light. That in essence, removes the entire need for and concept of, Relativity.
 
  • #34
LBrandt said:
That doesn't make sense to me at all. Let's forget a traveler for the moment. I can visualize a clock on Earth and a clock on Planet X being set in sync simply by having simultaneous signals sent from a THIRD planet that is equidistant from both Earth and Planet X. Forgetting travelers, forgetting relativity, forgetting everything, I can do that! Surely, you will allow that scenario.

I never said that you couldn't. The problem is that not everyone will agree that the Earth clock and Planet X clock are in sync.

Much of Relativity doesn't seem to make sense when compared to everyday experience.

We expect it to be the same time in Atlanta and New York regardless of whether we are standing along the road between them or driving along the road between them. Relativity says otherwise. It says that if you are driving from one to the other, it will not be the same time in the two cities. We just don't notice it because at the speed of a car the difference is too small to measure.

Relativity requires that we rethink how we consider time and space and toss out some of the notions about it that we got by observing the slow moving world around us.
 
  • #35
I really think the link I gave to The Elegant Universe's relativity section is a pretty simple and straightforward explanation. *shrug*
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
644
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
650
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K