How Does Relative Motion Affect Perception of Process Speed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter tiz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativity
tiz
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I'm having trouble understanding the question below. Conceptually I don't see how there would be a difference in speed? Maybe someone can help me shine some light on it...it'd be appreciated!

If you are observing a process moving with respect to you, would you see the rate at which this process proceeds as speeded up or slowed down compared to the same process not moving with respect to you?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
time dilation

Per special relativity, a moving clock (or any other temporal process) is measured to run slowly compared to your own clocks (which are at rest with respect to you). The only way to understand how this comes about is to study a bit of relativity.
 
It is a poorly phrased question.
Assume for example you have a process that cycles to produce what you see a green light. The exact same process coming toward you would still produce green light but you would see it a blue light as though the process was running faster. But once this process passed you and was going away it would look red as if it were running slow.

This is a Doppler Effect and is what you would “see” from direct observation. You would need to adjust for that effect to interpret what must be going on in the process even from your perspective (reference frame). When you do you will see that it comes out as running at the same rate coming and going, but slower from your perspective (or reference frame) that it would be as observed by those traveling with the process, (they see the same green as your local process).

As Doc Al said, you need to spend some time working on special relativity for a while to make that part clear.
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top