Is Time Dilation Caused by Motion or the Fabric of Time Itself?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the nature of time dilation, specifically whether it is caused by motion or the fabric of time itself. Participants agree that time dilation occurs when objects are in relative motion, as described by Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. They emphasize that while the mathematical framework of physics can predict time dilation, the fundamental reasons behind it remain elusive. The conversation also touches on the philosophical implications of asking "why" certain physical phenomena occur, suggesting that current scientific understanding may not fully address these deeper inquiries.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity
  • Familiarity with the concept of time dilation
  • Basic knowledge of gravitational effects on time
  • Awareness of the philosophical implications of scientific inquiry
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical principles of time dilation in Special Relativity
  • Explore the relationship between gravity and time as described by General Relativity
  • Investigate philosophical questions surrounding the nature of time and space
  • Examine experimental evidence supporting time dilation, such as particle decay observations
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, philosophers, students of relativity, and anyone interested in the fundamental nature of time and its relationship with motion and gravity.

  • #31
nickyrtr said:
It is a physical question, in my opinion. One observes time dilation because light signals (or any information signals) from a fast-moving source arrive at your detector in a slower sequence than the sender perceives them to be sent.

Likewise, if you communicate back to the sender, your light signals arrive in his detector in a slower sequence than you perceive them to have been sent.

I think that some care is needed; it seems that you're describing the Doppler effect, although I could be wrong. In reality, the phrase "a moving clock runs slow" does not necessarily mean "a moving clock is seen visually to run slow." A clock moving directly away from an observer appears visually to run slow, but a clock moving directly towards an observer appears visually to run fast. In both cases, what is seen visually is given by the Doppler expression, which is always different than the time dilation expression. In both cases, the time dilation expression, used appropriately, does apply.

Consider the following example.

Assume that Alice is moving with constant speed directly towards Ted. When Ted uses his telescope to watch Alice's wristwatch, he sees her watch running at a faster rate than his watch. Ted sees Alice's moving watch running fast, not slow! Ted sees this because of the Doppler shift. Because Alice moves towards Ted, the light that Ted sees from her watch is Doppler-shifted to a higher frequency. But the rate at which a clock or watch runs is like frequency, i.e., a second-hand revolves at a certain frequency, and all frequencies are Doppler-Shifted., so ted see Alice's wristwatch running fast.

To explain what "A moving clock runs slow." means, I first have to explain how Ted (with help from Bob) establishes his frame of reference.

Starting from Ted, a series of metre sticks, all at rest with respect to Ted, are laid end-to-end by Bob along the straight line joining Alice and Ted. At each joint between two consecutive metre sticks, Bob places a small clock. The metre sticks and clocks all are at rest with respect to Ted. Initially, none of the clocks are running; before turning them on, the clocks have to be synchronized. To do this, Ted directs a laser pointer along the line joining Ted and Alice, and then sends a flash of light. Each clock is turned on when the flash of light reaches it. The speed of light is not infinite, so the time taken for the light to travel from Ted to each clock has to be taken into account. To do this, the clocks' hands are set initially as follows. The clock one metre away from Ted is set to the time taken for light to travel one metre; the clock two metres away from the tower is set to the time taken for light to travel two metres; ... .

This whole setup of metre sticks and clocks establishes Ted's reference frame.

Now, As Alice moves toward Ted, Ted uses his telescope to watch Alice's wristwatch, and to watch his clocks. First, he watches one of the distant clocks in his reference frame. The time he sees on the clock is the time at which the light he sees set out from the clock, so Ted sees an earlier time on the distant clock than he sees on his wristwatch. Because the clock is stationary in his frame, Ted does, however, see the distant clock running at the same rate as his watch. Similarly, Ted's sees all the clocks in his frame running at the same rate as his watch.

As Alice approaches Ted, she whizzes by clock after clock of Ted's reference frame. Using his telescope, Ted sees that Alice is beside a particular clock, and he notes the time on her watch and the time on the clock adjacent to her. Some time later, Ted sees Alice beside a different clock, and he again notes the time on her watch and the time on the clock adjacent to her.

Ted checks his notes, and he finds that the time that elapsed on Alice's watch as she moved between these two clocks of his frame is less than the difference of the readings of the two clocks. This what is meant by "A moving clock runs slow."

Unfortunately, "time dilation" in general relativity and "time dilation" in special relativity often have different operational meanings. Suppose observer A hovers at a large distance from a Schwarzschild black hole, and that observer B hovers near the event horizon. If observer A uses a telescope to observe B's watch, A will see B's watch running more slowly than his own watch. In this context, gravitational time dilation is something that is seen visually.
nickyrtr said:
The basic cause of this effect is the law that every observer must see that light propagates with the same speed. No explanation 'why' is offered for this law, it is a first principle which (so far) agrees with experiments.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
970
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K