How does speed affect time in Einstein's theory of relativity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Snip3r
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Speed Time
Snip3r
Messages
102
Reaction score
0
Hi I m new here. i hv been thinking,searching abt this but could get no where
If i m moving in a rocket away from earth, people on Earth will notice my clock ticking slower.But they are moving at the same velocity wrt me.So will i notice their clocks ticking slower?if not why?essentially i m having hard time trying to understand how speed changes time when there is no absolute rest. per Einstein if i m in spaceship traveling at say 0.866C so when i travel for 10 yrs wrt Earth my clock would only show 5 years..can i say Earth is in motion wrt me and ticks only 2.5 yrs as my clock read 5 yrs?i m sure am missing something here can some one explain it more clearly?

thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Time dilation is always with respect to a stationary frame and is related to the speed that any observer/object/clock is moving in that frame. In a frame in which the Earth is at rest, your clock will tick at one half the normal rate because you are the one that is moving and the Earth's clocks will tick at the normal rate because it is not moving. In a frame in which you are at rest, your clock will tick normally and since the Earth is moving, its clock will tick at one half the rate. You need to pick one frame in which to assign the speed of objects and then you can determine the time dilation for each of those objects. Just think what it would be like if someone said that you were traveling at 0.866c away from the Earth and at the same time the Earth was traveling 0.866c away from you and then they tried to say that the net speed difference was way more the 0.866c. That would be nonsense, wouldn't it? In the same way, when you assign time dilation to both objects, you get nonsense. So don't do that.
 
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