Does Traveling at Light Speed Eliminate the Dimension of Time?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mtworkowski@o
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the implications of traveling at the speed of light in relation to the dimension of time, as described by Einstein's special theory of relativity. Participants explore theoretical aspects of time as a dimension within the framework of spacetime, and whether reaching light speed would affect the perception or existence of time.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that if a massive object could reach light speed, it would be "frozen in time" compared to slower observers.
  • Others argue that special relativity explicitly states that a massive object can never reach the speed of light, thus the premise of the question is flawed.
  • A participant notes that the theory does not explain what happens at light speed since it precludes massive objects from achieving that speed.
  • One participant discusses the definition of dimensions in the context of spacetime, explaining that time is considered a dimension because it is necessary to specify an event uniquely.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about viewing time as a separate dimension, suggesting that spacetime should be seen as an amalgamation of space and time.
  • There is a discussion about how the elapsed time between events is determined by four dimensions, with some participants emphasizing the role of time in this context.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the implications of light speed on the dimension of time, with some asserting that time would be lost while others maintain that the premise is invalid due to the constraints of special relativity. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views present.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on interpretations of the definitions of dimensions and the nature of spacetime, which may not be universally agreed upon. The discussion also highlights the limitations of extrapolating concepts from special relativity to scenarios that are not physically realizable.

mtworkowski@o
Messages
213
Reaction score
0
Einstein's special theory of relativity states that if a massive object could reach light speed, then it would be frozen in time compared to an observer who was moving at anything less than the speed of light.

Time is a dimension in special and general relativity, right?

Wouldn't traveling at the speed of light make your reality lose the dimension of time?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mtworkowski@o said:
Einstein's special theory of relativity states that if a massive object could reach light speed, then it would be frozen in time compared to an observer who was moving at anything less than the speed of light.
No, it doesn't. Special relativity states that a massive object can never move at the speed of light.
 
The special theory of relativity does not say this.

The theory precludes the possibility for any massive object to actually go c, so it does not attempt to explain what would happen if one could.

- Warren
 
cristo said:
No, it doesn't. Special relativity states that a massive object can never move at the speed of light.

I agree
 
Harut82 said:
I agree

See, now we opened the thread back up, and it was a good one.
 
mtworkowski@o said:
Time is a dimension in special and general relativity, right?
The term "dimension" as it is used in that statement refers to how many numbers are required in order to uniquely specify something like a point in a manifold (fancy word for "set" or "space"). It takes one number to uniquely a point on a curve. It takes two numbers to uniquely specify a point on the surface of a sphere. It takes three numbers to uniquely a point in space. Likewise it takes four numbers to uniquely specify an event. One has to give three numbers to specify where the event occurred and one number to specify when the event occurred. The set of all events is referred to as spacetime and is thus a four dimensional set/manifold/space. In this sense "time" is said to be a "dimension" in this space.
Wouldn't traveling at the speed of light make your reality lose the dimension of time?
Since nothing can travel at the speed of light the question has no answer. The reason people say that time stops at the speed of light is because they use an extrapolation. Its used so that one can speak of null worldlines. The interval between two closely spaced events on a null worldline is zero.

Pete
 
mtworkowski@o said:
Time is a dimension in special and general relativity, right?
The amount of time an observer measures between two events is determined by four dimensions. But I would disagree with the notion that time is a separate dimension, I rather see 4 dimensional spacetime as an amalgamation of space and time.
 
MeJennifer said:
The amount of time an observer measures between two events is determined by four dimensions.
The same thing can be said in non-relativistic mechanics with no mention of a fourth dimension
But I would disagree with the notion that time is a separate dimension, I rather see 4 dimensional spacetime as an amalgamation of space and time.
For what reason? Do you think that time does not fit any definition of dimension? In spacetime time is a dimension in that it is a number which is required to identify one event amoung many.

Pete
 
pmb_phy said:
For what reason? Do you think that time does not fit any definition of dimension? In spacetime time is a dimension in that it is a number which is required to identify one event amoung many.
The elapsed time between two events is expressed in terms of four dimensions not just one.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
6K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 95 ·
4
Replies
95
Views
7K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K