Light moves at C from all frames of references?

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of light moving at the speed of light from all frames of reference. It is mentioned that time dilation occurs when an object is moving relative to an observer, causing the object's clock to appear to run slower. The conversation also explores the effects of velocity addition and Lorentz transformations on objects in motion. The final question asks about the positioning of two spheres of light emitted from a moving ship and a stationary space station, and how it would appear from different frames of reference.
  • #1
Bigman
27
0
there are a few things i don't get when it comes to light moving at c from all frames of reference... i mean it makes sense to me in some cases: like if an observer on the Earth sees a missle going one way at half the speed of light, and a spaceship going the other way at the speed of light, the spaceship won't observe the missle's speed as the speed of light, since time goes faster on the spaceship then it does to the observer on the Earth (at least that's my understanding so far from what I've read... just to double check, is everything i said in that example accurate?)

but i can think of a few examples where it doesn't work out as easily (some of them are harder to explain then others). here's one: you have a space station floating out in the middle of no where in space (this is our initial reference point... i would have used earth, but i wanted to avoid all the gravity and orbits and rotation and stuff) and a ship takes off from the station, and ends up doing about half the speed of light (from the station's frame of reference). since the ship has sped up, the clock on board the ship is now going faster then the clock on board the space station (right?). now, let's say you eject two escape pods from the ship: one out the front, and one out the back(the ship is still facing directly away from the station), and they each shoot out with a velocity which, from the ships frame of reference, has a magnitude equal to the velocity of the space station (which is less then half the speed of light, because time is moving faster on the ship then it is on the space station... right?). what confuses me is, how fast are the clocks on board each of the escape pods going in relation to the spaceship, the space station, and each other?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Clocks do not magically change their rate simply because they are moving. If you're on-board a star ship, you will look down at your wristwatch and see it behaving perfectly normally, no matter how fast the star ship is going relative to anything else in the universe.

You must have two frames of reference in order to see any effects of time dilation. If a ship leaves a space station at half the speed of light, it will appear to observers in the space station that clocks aboard the ship are running slowly. Similarly, it will appear to observers on the ship that the clocks aboard the space station are running slowly.

Velocities do not add as simply in special relativity as you are accustomed. If an escape pod leaves the ship at 0.5c wrt the ship, and the ship is moving at 0.5c wrt the space station, the two velocities add like this:

[itex]v = \frac{ 0.5c + 0.5c }{ 1 + \frac{ 0.5c \cdot 0.5c } { c^2 } } = 0.8c[/itex]

Observers aboard the space station will measure the escape pod as moving away with a velocity of 0.8c.

- Warren
 
  • #3
Bigman said:
... and a spaceship going the other way at the speed of light, ...

No material object (anything with greater than zero rest mass) can go at the speed of light relative to any observer.


Bigman said:
... since time goes faster on the spaceship then it does to the observer on the Earth ...

Generally the clocks on any object moving relative to an observer are measured as "ticking" slower by that observer.


Bigman said:
... and a ship takes off from the station, and ends up doing about half the speed of light (from the station's frame of reference). since the ship has sped up, the clock on board the ship is now going faster then the clock on board the space station (right?).

slower

Bigman said:
now, let's say you eject two escape pods from the ship: one out the front, and one out the back(the ship is still facing directly away from the station), and they each shoot out with a velocity which, from the ships frame of reference, has a magnitude equal to the velocity of the space station (which is less then half the speed of light, because time is moving faster on the ship then it is on the space station... right?). what confuses me is, how fast are the clocks on board each of the escape pods going in relation to the spaceship, the space station, and each other?

Use the relativistic velocity addition equation to figure out the speed of the pods and then the Lorentz transformations for time to answer this question.

See http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/velocity.html
 
  • #4
woops, i meant to say that the ship was moving half the speed of light in the first example. in the second example, i was interested mostly in the time dilation, though i think that makes more sense to me now, after reading warren's post in another thread... so now i have a question that has more to do with light itself: let's say you have a ship flying by a space station at .5c, both the ship and the space station have big bright light bulbs protruding from them, and the moment that the ship flies by the space station, both lights flash for an instant (so basically, you have light coming from two sources, which are in virtually the same spot in space but have different velocities). I'm wondering, if you freeze frame everything a moment later, will the two spheres of light be overlapping each other? and if so, where will the center of these spheres be located, at the position of the ship or the station (or will the center's position be somehow dependant on the frame of reference)?
 
  • #5
Bigman said:
woops, i meant to say that the ship was moving half the speed of light in the first example. in the second example, i was interested mostly in the time dilation, though i think that makes more sense to me now, after reading warren's post in another thread... so now i have a question that has more to do with light itself: let's say you have a ship flying by a space station at .5c, both the ship and the space station have big bright light bulbs protruding from them, and the moment that the ship flies by the space station, both lights flash for an instant (so basically, you have light coming from two sources, which are in virtually the same spot in space but have different velocities). I'm wondering, if you freeze frame everything a moment later, will the two spheres of light be overlapping each other? and if so, where will the center of these spheres be located, at the position of the ship or the station (or will the center's position be somehow dependant on the frame of reference)?


The center of the expanding spheres will depend on the frame of reference.
 
  • #6
that can't be possible, can it? let's say you had two sensors attached to the spaceship, one out a mile in front of the ship and one out a mile in the back (imagine long mic booms sticking off the front and back), and you had two more sensors attached to the station in a similar fasion, and when the ship and station pass each other, the two sensors in the front are next to each other, as are the two sensors in the back. would the ship record that both it's sensors went off at the same time? if so, would an observer on the ship say that the light hit the station's front sensor before hitting the station's back sensor, since the ships sensors and the stations sensors are no longer next to each other by the time the light reaches them?
 
  • #7
Bigman said:
... let's say you have a ship flying by a space station at .5c, both the ship and the space station have big bright light bulbs protruding from them, and the moment that the ship flies by the space station, both lights flash for an instant (so basically, you have light coming from two sources, which are in virtually the same spot in space but have different velocities). I'm wondering, if you freeze frame everything a moment later, will the two spheres of light be overlapping each other? and if so, where will the center of these spheres be located, at the position of the ship or the station (or will the center's position be somehow dependant on the frame of reference)?

Imagine that the light sources are so close together at the passing point that we can treat them as one light source for practical purposes. From the point of view of the space station there is ring of light centred on the space station. From the point of view of the ship (some moments later) there is a ring of light centered on the ship.

The ship sees itself as stationary and from that point of view it initially sees the space station approaching. At the moment the space station was alongside it sees a flash and then it sees a ring of light spreading out evenly in all directions and the space station moving away.

The spacestation sees itself as stationary and from that point of view it initially sees the ship approaching. At the moment the ship was alongside it sees a flash and then it sees a ring of light spreading out evenly in all directions and the ship moving away.

See the symmetry?

This is what would really be observed, even if there is only one light source like a spark flashing across a small gap between the two craft at they moment they are closest to each other.

This website might help your understanding http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/sr/centre.html
 
  • #8
Bigman said:
that can't be possible, can it? let's say you had two sensors attached to the spaceship, one out a mile in front of the ship and one out a mile in the back (imagine long mic booms sticking off the front and back), and you had two more sensors attached to the station in a similar fasion, and when the ship and station pass each other, the two sensors in the front are next to each other, as are the two sensors in the back. would the ship record that both it's sensors went off at the same time? if so, would an observer on the ship say that the light hit the station's front sensor before hitting the station's back sensor, since the ships sensors and the stations sensors are no longer next to each other by the time the light reaches them?

The ship will say the light hit its sensors simultaneouly, while hitting the sensors of the station at different times. Conversely, the station will say that the light hit it's sensors simultaneouly, while hitting the ships sensors at different times.

Welcome to "The Relativity of Simultaneity".
 
  • #9
wow... so if someone in the ship were somehow able to instantaneously observe light, they would observe that the light hit the station's front sensor first, then the ships two sensors, then the stations back sensor(and someone in the station would observe everything i just said, with the words "station" and "ship" switched)?
 
  • #10
Bigman said:
wow... so if someone in the ship were somehow able to instantaneously observe light, they would observe that the light hit the station's front sensor first, then the ships two sensors, then the stations back sensor(and someone in the station would observe everything i just said, with the words "station" and "ship" switched)?

Yes.

Also consider this:
We put clocks at these sensors, all reading a time of zero and designed to start ticking when the sensor next to it is tripped by the light. Then according to the ship, the clocks next to its sensors start at the same time and are synchronized so that they show the same time at all times. The station's clocks, however, will not start at the same time and thus will not show the same time after they are running (once running they both tick at the same rate, but one clock will lag behind the other.) According to the station, the reverse is true.
 

Related to Light moves at C from all frames of references?

1. How can light move at the same speed from all frames of reference?

Light is considered to be an electromagnetic wave, and according to Einstein's theory of relativity, the speed of light is constant in a vacuum and is independent of the frame of reference. This means that no matter how fast an observer is moving, they will measure the same speed of light.

2. Does this mean that the speed of light is the fastest speed in the universe?

Yes, according to our current understanding of physics, the speed of light is the fastest speed in the universe. Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, and this is why it is often referred to as the cosmic speed limit.

3. Can light ever slow down or speed up?

In a vacuum, light will always travel at a constant speed of approximately 299,792,458 meters per second. However, when light travels through a medium such as water or glass, it can slow down due to interactions with the material. This is why light appears to bend when passing through a prism.

4. What is the significance of light moving at a constant speed from all frames of reference?

This concept has major implications for our understanding of space and time. It means that the laws of physics are the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion. This is the foundation of Einstein's theory of relativity, which has revolutionized our understanding of the universe.

5. Are there any exceptions to the rule that light travels at a constant speed?

While the speed of light is constant in a vacuum, it can be affected by gravity. According to Einstein's theory of general relativity, light can be bent by the gravitational pull of massive objects such as stars and black holes. This is known as gravitational lensing and has been observed by astronomers.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
760
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
98
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
723
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
217
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
128
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
Back
Top