Movement & Spacetime: Point A to B Difference

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter matthewmussen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Movement Spacetime
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the conceptual differences between two scenarios involving movement in space-time: one where a subject moves from point A to point B, and another where the space-time itself warps while the subject remains stationary. The focus includes theoretical implications for motion, perception, and the nature of space-time.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that in the first scenario, the subject experiences actual movement from A to B, while in the second scenario, the subject perceives no movement as points A and B coincide due to the warping of space-time.
  • Others argue that the curvature of space-time is a key factor in distinguishing between the two scenarios, suggesting that the second scenario implies a curved space-time.
  • A participant mentions that external reference points, such as distant stars, could help differentiate the experiences in both scenarios.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of wordlines in space-time, noting that in curved space-time, these lines can cross even if they were initially parallel.
  • There is a suggestion that the theoretical framework could alter the understanding of particle motion, proposing that if all particles are motionless and only space-time warps, it might redefine the concept of velocity.
  • A reference is made to the expansion of the universe as an example of how distance changes in a non-local context, which may differ from local inertial frames.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of space-time warping and its effect on motion and perception. No consensus is reached regarding the theoretical challenges posed to established concepts like Einstein's Absolute Spacetime theory.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific interpretations of space-time and motion, and there are unresolved assumptions about the nature of velocity and reference frames in the context of the discussion.

matthewmussen
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
what would be the difference between the idea of being at point A and moving toward B in space-time; and being at point A and not moving and B not moving but the space-time between them moving and warping out of the way?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Didn't you just answer it yourself while asking the question? In the second case, space-time is curved. I assume that's not what you wanted to hear, since you said so yourself. What sort of answer are you looking for?
 
matthewmussen said:
what would be the difference between the idea of being at point A and moving toward B in space-time; and being at point A and not moving and B not moving but the space-time between them moving and warping out of the way?

The difference is that is scenario 1, the subject would have the epxreince of moving from A to B, whereas in scenario 2, the subject would ahve the experience of not moving while the two points would move to coincide.

It would be easy to tell the difference merely by observing external reference points, such as distant stars.
 
matthewmussen said:
what would be the difference between the idea of being at point A and moving toward B in space-time; and being at point A and not moving and B not moving but the space-time between them moving and warping out of the way?
Particles have wordlines in spacetime and cross events which are points. In a curved spacetime worldlines can cross even if at some point the lines were parallel to each other.

But spacetime itself is fixed, it does not change.
 
Last edited:
Fredrik said:
Didn't you just answer it yourself while asking the question? In the second case, space-time is curved. I assume that's not what you wanted to hear, since you said so yourself. What sort of answer are you looking for?


would the idea change the way the motion, or lack thereof, of particles, is conceived; where as all particles are motionless, only space-time warps, muli-dimentionally. (i.e. - "my arm is not moving my fingers to my nose, but the amount of space time is curving or moving so there is less between them.) we would perceive in 3+1 dimensional space, as my arm is moving my fingers to my nose, using Einstein's perspective.

----------


DaveC426913 said:
The difference is that is scenario 1, the subject would have the epxreince of moving from A to B, whereas in scenario 2, the subject would ahve the experience of not moving while the two points would move to coincide.

It would be easy to tell the difference merely by observing external reference points, such as distant stars.


fredrik, thank you sir, but this idea is theoretical. visible external reference other than point A and point B (the sight of my fingers and the feel of my nose) are not applicable in this theoretical scenario.

MeJennifer said:
Particles have wordlines in spacetime and cross events which are points. In a curved spacetime worldlines can cross even if at some point the lines were parallel to each other.

But spacetime itself is fixed, it does not change.


Thank you MeJennifer, but your answer is based on part on Einstein's "Absolute Spacetime theory"in which this thread is written to challenge.

thanks to you all for helping
 
matthewmussen said:
would the idea change the way the motion, or lack thereof, of particles, is conceived;
I guess you can say that it changes the meaning of velocity. Consider e.g. the case of galaxies moving away from each other due to the expansion of the universe. I'm quoting myself from another thread:

Fredrik said:
When we say that galaxy A and galaxy B are moving apart with speed v, it really means that "the proper distance between A and B along the shortest possible path in the hypersurface of constant time coordinate changes by v units of length for each unit of time that we change the time coordinate".
This speed is something very different from the speed an object has in a local inertial frame. That's why it can be >c.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K