B Does Time Dilation Occur in a Perfectly Circular Orbit at Near-Light Speed?

[Steeve Leaf]

I 've waited 50 years to understand Newton.

A spaceship orbits Earth at 300,000 km distance at speed 0.5c broadcasting live images of the clock aboard, will the clocks difference will be 1 sec?

The orbit is a perfect circle.

Its moving close to the speed of light but stays at the same distance.

Is the clocks difference between the one on Earth and the images received by broadcast from the ship stay the same ?

 

[Janus]

For every second passing on the Earth, a person on Earth will see only 0.866 seconds worth of images from the ship. After one second, the he will see the ship clock reading 1.866 sec behind his own ( the one sec being due to light propagation delay) after two seconds it will be 2.732 sec behind his, after three seconds it will be be behind by 3.598 sec, etc.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Thanks, as I understand from the answer the one second delay is from the distance and 0.866 is from the speed.
No acceleration involved, or is it acceleration due to the change of direction.
If we increase the speed there will be a formula to show that 0.866 will decrease. Is it possible to explain it in words first ?

 

[Janus]

Thanks, as I understand from the answer the one second delay is from the distance and 0.866 is from the speed.
No acceleration involved, or is it acceleration due to the change of direction.( consider the fact that in order to circle the Earth at 0.5c with a radius of 300,000 km, you would have to be supplying constant thrust towards the Earth.)

Yes there is acceleration due to the changing direction.

If we increase the speed there will be a formula to show that 0.866 will decrease. Is it possible to explain it in words first ?

It would be the same formula as you would use for time dilation. (In this example we are ignoring the gravitational time dilation between the altitude of the rocket and the Earth clock which is very small. Now if the velocity of the rocket were small enough, like it would be if it were in non-powered orbit, then to get an accurate answer you would have to factor in gravitational time dilation)

 

[Steeve Leaf]

The reason I asked this question is because i think i understand why the clock goes faster compared to the ship who traveling away but not why it is for a ship traveling toward you. There might be two different issues here. One the doppler effect and the other I don't know/understand. I don't think you calculated allready the acceleration due to the fast orbit so I ask again to make sure .
Is the 0.866 value is due to 0.5c speed or it will change if the ship will orbit at 600,000 km distance at the same speed ( and reduce the amount of acceleration on it). ?

 

[Janus]

The time difference will is due to the speed alone, the radius of the circle and the acceleration experienced by the ship are not contributing factors. ( you may be interested to know that this has been verified by experiment. samples of radioisotopes have been put into high speed centrifuges and then had their decay rates measured.

So yes, for a rocket ship moving away, there are two effects that combine that result in what you see. One is the effect caused by the changing distance between the craft and observer due to the relative velocity and the the other is time dilation which is just due to the relative speed. If the spaceship is moving towards you, the decreasing distance factor due to the velocity towards you will cause you to see its clock running fast, however, if you factor this out, the spaceship clock will be ticking slow due to its relative speed with respect to you.

The Light clock is usually used to explain time dilation. It is a simply clock that counts time by a light bouncing between two mirrors.
The vital fact to keep in mind is that the speed of light is invariant. And by this we mean that everyone gets the same value for the speed of light relative to themselves regardless of relative velocity the source of the light has relative to them.

To visualize what I mean, Assume you have to observers, A and B that have some relative velocity towards each other. At the moment they pass each other, they each set off a flash of light. What does A and B measure as happening to the expanding spheres of light? Each will measure both spheres expanding outward from him at c (he will remain at, or at least very, near the center of each expanding sphere.Z)

So now let's imagine that each of them are carrying a light clock. Each will see the light from his own clock travel between the mirrors at c. If the mirrors are 150000 km apart they each measure the round trip for their own light clock to take ~1 sec( not exactly, because the speed of light is just a tad less than 300,000 km/sec)
But what happens for the other light clock? if A sees the light for it traveling at c relative to him, while B travel is also traveling at v with respect to him, he must measure B's light pulse as taking longer to make its round trip than he does for his own light pulse.
Here is an animation demonstrating this.
https://www.physicsforums.com/attachments/194912

Each pulse of light bouncing back and forth is shown by a dot. The expanding circles show how each pulse is on an expanding front moving at c relative to the observer.
For this animation, the relative speed between the two clocks is 0.866c. Note that the clock at "rest" ticks twice ( two seconds) for every one time(1 sec) the moving clock ticks.
I put "rest" in quotes because, as far as the clock shown as moving here is concerned, he is the one at rest. So he measures his light clock as taking 1 sec per round trip. In fact, as far as he is concerned, it is the other clock that is moving to the left and is ticking slow relative to his own.

Please note that none of this involves how light travels between the two clocks, which would involve including the Doppler shift effect.

Now how does this apply to your original scenario?

In the example I just gave, both clocks are in inertial motion (not-accelerating). In your example, one of the clocks is in constant acceleration towards the other (even though due to its circular path it maintains a constant difference.) Above I mentioned that the acceleration of the ship had no affect on the time difference as measured by the Earth. However, it does have an effect on how the ship measures the time difference. The acceleration towards the Earth causes the ship to measure images coming from the Earth to run fast by a factor of 1.1547 (1/0.866) and two factors determine how fast the ship measures the Earth clock tick rate to be: The acceleration experienced by the ship and the distance between ship and Earth. Increasing the distance while maintaining the same speed decreases the acceleration, and the combination ends up giving the same answer for the difference in tick rate between the two.

Having said that, I will advise you to forgo dealing with scenarios that deal with acceleration, until you have a strong grasp of what happens in purely inertial situations. Also, there are two other aspects of Relativity that you have to grasp before you can properly deal with Relativity even in inertial motion cases. These are length contraction and the relativity of simultaneity.

The light clock example above is one of the few cases where you don't need to take the other two effects into account, but in most cases this is not true. (For example if you tried to analyze the same light clock experiment with the light clocks aligned with the line of relative motion between the clocks.)

I hope this helps.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Thank you.
What you are describing is an optical illusion ( the effect of speed on clock for an observer).
If the ship will broadcast an image of a digital watch on the ship to Earth every time it completes orbit the difference between the clocks will stay the same 1 sec at 300000 km away.
I saw the formula that you used to get the 0.866 (√(1−(v²/c²)) and I admire it but it is still illusion because everyone will see the other clock go slower by that amount.
I 'm sorry if you think that I'm wrong (and maybe I am) but I am very thankful for you trying to explain it to me.

 

[Nugatory]

If the ship will broadcast an image of a digital watch on the ship to Earth every time it completes orbit the difference between the clocks will stay the same 1 sec at 300000 km away.

It will not. We've actually done this (with the GPS system) and the difference does not stay the same.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Thar is gravity effect, not speed .
I don't know why gravity affect time but it is of an interest.
Gravity is a force that can effect everything including time measuring devices.
Assume that speed don't affect time (for a moment).
The TWIN-PARADOX version with gravity/acceleration will be:
Twin A on Earth at 1g twin B accelerate at 1g for one year and then at -1g for two years then at 1g until it land on Earth.
Are they aged the same ?

 

[Nugatory]

Thar is gravity effect, not speed .

The GPS satellites are subject to gravitational time dilation, but that makes them run faster (because they are at a higher gravitational potential), not slower. They are are also subject to time dilation caused by their speed relative to the surface of the earth, which causes them to run slower, and that's what I was referring to.

In low Earth orbit the relative speed effect is greater than the gravitational effect and the orbiting clock runs slow relative to the earth-based clock. In higher orbits it's the other way around.

 

[Janus]

Thank you.
What you are describing is an optical illusion ( the effect of speed on clock for an observer).
If the ship will broadcast an image of a digital watch on the ship to Earth every time it completes orbit the difference between the clocks will stay the same 1 sec at 300000 km away.
I saw the formula that you used to get the 0.866 (√(1−(v²/c²)) and I admire it but it is still illusion because everyone will see the other clock go slower by that amount.

Not in the scenario with the ship circling the Earth. The equation given only applies when you are considering what the observer in an inertial frame measures (and in this case, we can consider the Earth to be an inertial frame for all practical purposes. However it can not be applied to the observer in the spaceship, who is in an accelerated frame. When you apply the rules for observers in accelerated frames, to the ship observer, you find that he sees the Earth clock running fast. Thus if you were to stop the experiment and bring the ship to a state of rest with respect to the Earth, both the Ship and Earth will agree that that less time accrued for the ship than did for the Earth.
This is an example of what I meant by jumping into scenarios with acceleration before fully grasping how to deal with inertial motion scenarios.

I 'm sorry if you think that I'm wrong (and maybe I am) but I am very thankful for you trying to explain it to me.

It not that I think you are wrong, it is the established facts that say you are wrong.

Besides the GPS example already given, there is the centrifuge experiment I mentioned in my post. You take a sample of a radioisotope and put it on a centrifuge which is spun at a high speed for a period of time. After which you compare this sample to a sample that was not spun on the centrifuge to see if there is any difference in how much the samples decayed, and if so, by how much. Now by doing this several times with centrifuges of different radii and spinning at different speeds, you can determine what effects the difference in decay rate. For example by changing the radii and rotational velocity you can have samples that travel at the same speed but experience different accelerations, or travel at different speeds and experience the same acceleration. At the end of the run for each experiment, the spun samples are again compared to a lab sample.

These experiments have actually been done with samples experiencing extremely high accelerations. In every case, the difference in decay rate for the spun sample was related to the speed it was spun in accordance to the time dilation equation and nothing else.

It makes no sense to call something an optical illusion when it has verified by real-life experiment.

Your reaction to the idea that both will measure the other clock as running slow (in inertial velocity cases) is typical for those new to Relativity. It can be hard to accept that time behaves in a manner that seems so against our intuition. And as I also mentioned, the other two effects are also needed to forma complete picture. All the apparent contradictions that arise when you just consider time dilation disappear when the other two effects are included in the analysis.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

You manage to synchronize all the GPS satellites at different heights and speeds using formulas, that is convincing and admirable.
Thank you .

 

[mrspeedybob]

The light clock explanation may make time dilation look like an illusion that occurs in that particular circumstance, but if you stop and think about what time actually is, in every way that matters, it is the rate at which things happen. The rate a clock ticks, the rate of radioactive decay, the rate of a chemical reaction, the rate at which we age, etc. All those processes involve interactions between subatomic particles. All those interactions involve forces acting between the particles. And all those forces propagate at the speed of light. So, if the forces have to travel further to make things happen, then the process will be slowed. It is exactly the same phenomena the light clock demonstrates, carried out between every single subatomic particle in a moving object, as opposed to just the 2 mirrors. You could pick 1 frame of reference and declare it stationary, and explain everything in terms of the increasing distances that force carriers must travel, but it's vastly simpler, both conceptually and mathematically, to call it time dilation.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Still on light speed and time topic but back to the basics.

Light travel at c at vacuum for every observer.

This I don't understand the above statement. The following scenario will maybe explain my misunderstanding.

A spaceship traveling at 0.5c transmitting radio signal forward at a speed of light compare to the ship.
It traveling from A to B. At the halfway point receiving a radio signal that was send from A to B. It intersect this signal and send it from its radio to B. If the radio signal travel at c compare to the ship, the signal from the ship will arrive earlier to B than the signal that was send from A.
Information can't travel faster than light speed c, what wrong with my Newtonian understanding ?

 

[Nugatory]

If the radio signal travel at c compare to the ship, the signal from the ship will arrive earlier to B than the signal that was send from A.

Both the signal from A and the retransmitted signal from the ship to B travel at speed $c$ relative to A, B, and the ship.

You are assuming that if the ship is moving at speed $u$ relative to A and B and the ship sends a signal towards B at speed $v$, that signal will be moving at speed $u+v$ relative to A. It's not - the correct formula is $(u+v)/(1+uv/c^2)$, and that leads to the conclusion that if the signal is sent at speed $c$ relative to the ship it's also moving at that speed relative to A and B.

If you compare the results of the two formulas for speeds that are small compared to the speed of light, you'll see how we could have gone for centuries without ever observing the difference between the two... But now that we can do sensitive enough experiments, it is clear that that $u+v$ formula is not right. As a historical note, the first observations of violations of the $u+v$ formula were done in 1851 by Fizeau; these remained mysterious until 1905 when Einstein developed special relativity.

Google for "relativistic velocity addition" for more information.

 

[Nugatory]

You manage to synchronize all the GPS satellites at different heights and speeds using formulas, that is convincing and admirable.

It might be more accurate to say that we are using formulas (that have previously been proven to work in many different situations) to correct for the observed fact that the clocks will not stay in synch without corrections.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

(u+v)/(1+uv/c2),

So simple Math for you but I don't know how to do it.
What the values of v compare to B.
if u=0.5c
and if
u=0.75c
?
“Nothing ever exists entirely alone. Everything is in relation to everything else.” – Buddha
than 1 min on the ship is
2 min
4 min
on A or B
Respectively respectfully , where did I got lost:)

 

[Janus]

So simple Math for you but I don't know how to do it.
What the values of v compare to B.
if u=0.5c
and if
u=0.75c
?
“Nothing ever exists entirely alone. Everything is in relation to everything else.” – Buddha
than 1 min on the ship is
2 min
4 min
on A or B
Respectively respectfully , where did I got lost:)

If u is the ship's velocity with respect to A and B, then v would be the velocity of something relative to the ship as measured by the ship, and w would be the relative velocity of that something relative to A and B as measured by A or B.
Thus if the ship is moving at 0.5c relative to A and B, and fires a projectile towards B at 0.5c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at
(0.5c+0.5c)/(1+0.5c(0.5c)/c^2) = 0.8c relative to themselves.

If the ship emits a radio signal towards B at c relative to itself as measured by the ship then it travels at (0.5c+c)/(1+0.5c(c)/c^2) = c relative to A and B as measured by either.

This is one of those scenarios I mentioned above where you are going to have to take all three relativistic effects, time dilation, length contraction and the relativity of simultaneity into account to form a coherent picture of what is happening.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Thanks for your patience.
Making sure that I can use this tool/formula currently.

Newton laws are good for speed that are not close to c.
If u=0.5c fires a projectile towards B at 0.5c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8c
By Newton it is c.
If u=0.75c fires a projectile towards B at 0.25c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8421c
By Newton it is c.
If u=0.25c fires a projectile towards B at 0.75c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8421c
By Newton it is c.
I think you will agree the above statements.

Now about time slow down

1. If the ship at 0.5c time slow down by 0.866
2. If the ship at 0.75c time slow down by 0.661

Is this in min or a factor
If it is a factor then
at 0.5c , for every min A and B will see 51.96 sec pass on the ship
at 0.75c, for every min A and B will see 39.66 sec pass on the ship.

Current so far ?

 

[Janus]

Thanks for your patience.
Making sure that I can use this tool/formula currently.
Newton laws are good for speed that are not close to c.

More accurately, the relativistic formula is good for all speeds, and gives answers that are almost exactly the same as that given by Newtonian velocity addition when the velocities involved are small when compared to c. In other, the relativistic formula is correct formula for all cases, but you can get away with using the Newtonian version at low velocities without sacrificing too much accuracy. We live in a relativistic universe, not a Newtonian one.

If u=0.5c fires a projectile towards B at 0.5c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8c
By Newton it is c.
If u=0.75c fires a projectile towards B at 0.25c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8421c
By Newton it is c.
If u=0.25c fires a projectile towards B at 0.75c relative to itself, then A and B will measure the projectile as moving at 0.8421c
By Newton it is c.
I think you will agree the above statements.

these look okay

Now about time slow down

1. If the ship at 0.5c time slow down by 0.866
2. If the ship at 0.75c time slow down by 0.661

Is this in min or a factor
If it is a factor then
at 0.5c , for every min A and B will see 51.96 sec pass on the ship
at 0.75c, for every min A and B will see 39.66 sec pass on the ship.

Current so far ?

It's a comparison rate. The ship clock runs at this rate compared to the clocks at A and B when compared by A and B (or anyone at rest with respect to A and B). On the other hand, the Clocks at A and B run at a slower rate than the Ship clock when compared to the ship clock by the ship.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

“At the still-point in the center of the circle one can see the infinite in all things.” – Chuang Tzu

In order to meet in synchronized manner two objects need to be at the same space at the same time ( 4 dimensions ) and at the same speed . ( without technology ).:)Length contraction.

All I know about it is that at near light speed the length of ship contract.
Are the people aboard aware of it ?

 

[jbriggs444]

All I know about it is that at near light speed the length of ship contract.
Are the people aboard aware of it ?

No. The length of the ship is unchanged when measured by passengers.

If the passengers use a tape measure, an outside observer will explain this result by noting that the tape is shortened exactly as much as the ship. If the passengers cleverly use a laser and a pair of stopwatches, an outside observer will explain this result as a combination of length contraction, time dilation and relativity of simultaneity.

Meanwhile, the passengers on the ship will conclude that the rest of the universe is contracted in length. Both "moving" and "stationary" observers consider the other to be length contracted and consider themselves to be normal.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Is this affect GPS satellites synchronization also ?

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Radioisotopes have been put into high speed centrifuges and their decay rates measured. This involves acceleration. How about speed alone?
The effect of gravity on time ?
Can any experiment be done on the effect of speed alone on decay ?
Time dilation effect on A and B observers, shouldn't it be different because the ship moving at different direction compare to them ?

 

[jbriggs444]

Can any experiment be done on the effect of speed alone on decay ?
Time dilation effect on A and B observers, shouldn't it be different because the ship moving at different direction compare to them ?

Cosmic ray muons reach the Earth's surface in numbers which indicate that the decay rate has been slowed in accordance with relativity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon#Muon_sources

 

[Nugatory]

Radioisotopes have been put into high speed centrifuges and their decay rates measured. This involves acceleration. How about speed alone?

- Centrifuges of different radius produce the same speed with different accelerations (or different speeds with the same acceleration). The observed decay rate follows the speed not the acceleration.
- We can and do measure the lifetimes of the particles created by collisions in colliders. These also are subject to a wide range of accelerations and speeds, and the observed decay rate follows the speed not the acceleration.
- The various muon lifetime experiments are a clear example of time dilation in particles traveling in a straight line with negligible acceleration.

The effect of gravity on time ?

we've already mentioned the GPS satellites. There's also the Pound-Rebka experiment, and its many variations.

Has anyone pointed you at https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/faq-experimental-basis-of-special-relativity.229034/ yet?

Also, remember that in all of these experiments the question is not "Are we observing some form of time dilation?" but "Exactly how much are we observing, and does it match the predictions of relativity?"

 

[Steeve Leaf]

What is the relative speed in this scenario ?
IS circle Earth every 90 min.
A spaceship named "Marcela" circle kilometers (maybe about 129e6 km) away at 0.5c.
It has synchronized its time of orbit with IS that it sees it all the time at the same position and distance.
What is the speed of Marcela relative to IS and how the optic clocks explain this time dilation ?

 

[David Lewis]

If the passengers use a tape measure, an outside observer will explain this result by noting
that the tape is shortened exactly as much as the ship.

The length of the ship doesn't change, no matter how fast it's going with respect to an outside observer, if we define length as whatever the tape measure says.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

The length of the ship doesn't change, no matter how fast it's going with respect to an outside observer, if we define length as whatever the tape measure says.

What about Marcela speed relative to ISS question above ?

 

[David Lewis]

Marcela will be at rest with respect to the ISS. If you connect a slender thread between two objects, and the thread neither goes slack nor breaks, then they are at rest with respect to each other.

 

[David Lewis]

A spaceship orbits Earth at 300,000 km distance at speed 0.5c...

At that altitude, orbital speed of the ship would be about 1140 m/s.

 

[jbriggs444]

At that altitude, orbital speed of the ship would be about 1140 m/s.

... for a circular orbit maintained by gravity.

For an orbit maintained by some unspecified (and large) force, the orbital speed can be 0.5 c as specified.

 

[David Lewis]

Good catch. I didn't notice OP's quote in post #4 positing a rocket engine supplying centripetal force.

 

[David Lewis]

The effect of gravity on time ?

If you have a Janus-style light clock in deep space ticking at the correct rate (neither fast nor slow) and then transport it to Earth, will the Earth’s gravitational field change the rate at which the clock ticks?

 

[jbriggs444]

If you have a Janus-style light clock in deep space ticking at the correct rate (neither fast nor slow) and then transport it to Earth, will the Earth’s gravitational field change the rate at which the clock ticks?

A properly running clock always ticks at one second per second.

 

[David Lewis]

Then if two properly functioning clocks disagree, they must have measured different amounts of time.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Marcela will be at rest with respect to the ISS. If you connect a slender thread between two objects, and the thread neither goes slack nor breaks, then they are at rest with respect to each other.

A spaceship orbits Earth at 300,000 km distance at speed 0.5c broadcasting live images of the clock aboard, will the clocks difference will be 1 sec?

The orbit is a perfect circle.

Its moving close to the speed of light but stays at the same distance.

Is the clocks difference between the one on Earth and the images received by broadcast from the ship stay the same ?

Change the distance from 300,000 km to 129e6 km and the original answer of 0.866 time dilation raising investigation, do you see why ?

 

[David Lewis]

Good point, but if we assume that all clocks tick at the rate of one second per second then we have defined time the same way I have defined distance (whatever a tape measure says).

 

[Steeve Leaf]

The number should be more like 0.9943 . neglecting Earth's spin. (?)

 

[Steeve Leaf]

Good point, but if we assume that all clocks tick at the rate of one second per second then we have defined time the same way I have defined distance (whatever a tape measure says).

The difference is that when a ship return from near light speed journey, it returns to the same length while the twin returns younger.

 

[Nugatory]

The difference is that when a ship return from near light speed journey, it returns to the same length while the twin returns younger.

Yes, but that asymmetrical effect has nothing to do with time dilation. Length contraction and time dilation are present only when the two ships are in motion relative to one another.

(if you have not yet found, read, and understood the twin paradox FAQ, now is the time to do so).

 

[Steeve Leaf]

I 've waited 50 years to understand Newton.

A spaceship orbits Earth at 300,000 km distance at speed 0.5c broadcasting live images of the clock aboard, will the clocks difference will be 1 sec?

The orbit is a perfect circle.

Its moving close to the speed of light but stays at the same distance.

Is the clocks difference between the one on Earth and the images received by broadcast from the ship stay the same ?

I 've a diffrent opinion on the answer.
The ship circle the Earth at a distance of 300,000 km.

The orbit leangth is 1.88e6 km.

At speed of 0.5c it takes 12.5333 sec

Thats is relative speed of 3,351. km/s compare to surface observer.
Not 0.5c .

3351/300000=0.01117
Put in the formula it comes out 0.994 ( at 42000 km Earth circumference ):)

Am I close ?

 

[jbriggs444]

At speed of 0.5c it takes 12.5333 sec

Thats is relative speed of 3,351. km/s compare to surface observer.
Not 0.5c .

The speed of an orbiting spacecraft and the speed of the point on the Earth's surface which is directly below such a spacecraft are not the same thing.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

This is the speed to calculate time dilation. see Marcela question to understand my point.
There compare to the ISS 0.5c Marcela got 0 relative speed and no time dilation.
If you understand my point and think that i am wrong please explain.
It is definitely out of my league I knew it before looking back into it ☺

 

[David Lewis]

The difference is that when a ship return from near light speed journey, it returns to the same length while the twin returns younger.

But the universe is squashed for the fast moving ship, so the ship doesn't have to travel as far. This savings of time (from the stationary observer's frame) due to less distance traveled is retained.

 

[jbriggs444]

This is the speed to calculate time dilation. see Marcela question to understand my point.
There compare to the ISS 0.5c Marcela got 0 relative speed and no time dilation.
If you understand my point and think that i am wrong please explain.
It is definitely out of my league I knew it before looking back into it ☺

I am not talking to Marcela. I am talking to you. A ship moving at 0.5c relative to the Earth is moving at 0.5c relative to the earth. If you think otherwise, please explain your reasoning.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

The farther the ship is the longer it takes for it to complete an orbit doing the same speed 0.5c.
In one case it is 12 sec and in the other 90 min.
In the 90 min case the relative speed compare to ISS was 0 according to an answer above, if this is true than iss relative speed is not ( even close ) 0.5c.
The same principle is used on the 12 sec ship.
The distance of the 0.5c circulating ships affect the time it takes them to do so and the realistic speed accordingly.

Unless the answer above is wrong (Mercela) I don't see the flow of my logic but I'm sure you can, so explain.

 

[_PJ_]

Anytime you have a light (or other massless entity) transmitted, it must be at c speed and this speed is agreed upon by ALL reference frames.
So in any situation when you want to understand the dilation of time or contraction of space, just consider a photon in your system as the basis for time.
Distances are then all calculated as result from time and lightspeed.

 

[Steeve Leaf]

In Length Contraction , does it matter if you coming or going ?
What about a little tilt of 3 dimensional objects ?
At near relative light speed of course.☺

 

[_PJ_]

In Length Contraction , does it matter if you coming or going ?
What about a little tilt of 3 dimensional objects ?
At near relative light speed of course.☺

Length contraction applies in the direction of motion. (The same can be said for time, time metric is dilated in direction at which we travel through time)

Actual speed doesn't matter, there is always contraction and dilation with motion, only that the effects are so small (to our perception scale) that they are negligible and only readily apparent when approaching speeds comparable to c