Question about gravity and speed of light

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on Einstein's theory of relativity, specifically addressing time dilation and the behavior of light in gravitational fields. Participants clarify that time dilation is not experienced by the observer but is relative to other frames of reference. The speed of light remains constant at 'c' regardless of the observer's motion. Additionally, the curvature of spacetime caused by mass affects different objects differently, with photons being minimally influenced compared to massive bodies like Earth.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's theory of relativity
  • Familiarity with concepts of time dilation and spacetime
  • Knowledge of the speed of light as a constant
  • Basic grasp of gravitational effects on light and massive objects
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the twin paradox and its implications on time dilation
  • Explore the mathematical framework of special relativity, including velocity addition formulas
  • Investigate gravitational time dilation and its effects on GPS technology
  • Examine the differences between massless particles (like photons) and massive particles in relativistic contexts
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of relativity, and anyone interested in the fundamental principles of time, light, and gravity will benefit from this discussion.

  • #31
apurvmj said:
Twin paradox says one of the twin will be younger if he is traveling at the speed high enough to notice time dilation.
No, it doesn't. It says that each twin will see the other twin as younger. The only "paradox" occurs when you arrange for the two twins to be again together and motionless with respect to each other. And then which is younger will depend upon exactly how they returned to that situation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Nugatory said:
Travelling relative to what? It is meaningless to speak of any speed without saying what it is relative to - remember that as far as you in the space lab are concerned, you are at not moving at all, it's just that if you look out the window you might see other things moving by relative to you.

Nugatory... No question is meaningless.
Technically he would be relative to "something" and that something is the light in his cosmological traveling lab. Light would be moving in all directions inside the lab. The reason he will be moving slower to relative light speed and space is because he is simply moving away from light at half the speed of light. Light will have to bounce off the object he sees then also have to catch up to his eyes at half its normal speed. (light speed travels 50% slower in the direction he moves away from it) remember that light travels at 186,000 mph, but from his new perspective it now tops at 93,000 mph (which is still astonishingly faster than sounds average speed of 760 mph) meaning that his interactions and perception wouldn't to much different from normal. MY QUESTION IS... IS SPEED AND TIME INTERTWINED?!.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #33
Jaami M. said:
Technically he would be relative to "something" and that something is the light in his cosmological traveling lab. Light would be moving in all directions inside the lab. The reason he will be moving slower to relative light speed and space is because he is simply moving away from light at half the speed of light. Light will have to bounce off the object he sees then also have to catch up to his eyes at half its normal speed. (light speed travels 50% slower in the direction he moves away from it) remember that light travels at 186,000 mph, but from his new perspective it now tops at 93,000 mph (which is still astonishingly faster than sounds average speed of 760 mph) meaning that his interactions and perception wouldn't to much different from normal.

This is entirely incorrect. As measured by the person aboard the station, the light moves at c, not at 1/2 c. You cannot define velocities relative to light and have any meaningful statement, as light moves at c for ALL inertial observers, no matter what their velocities relative to each other are.
 
  • #34
apurvmj said:
ok... then what made lead actor in movie 'Interstellar' look younger than rest of the universe. Am I making sense?

From the theories I've learned of and from my understanding it's because of the black hole he entered. Now whether it's possible to survive a black hole or not, when he left it he was in the future. This happened because of how time-space Bends and warps around the black hole, because of its Immense Gravitational Field, making "time" also warp. Ultimately making your perceptive relevance to other humans appear to move slower. From my understanding, if he ENTERED a BLACK HOLE, he should be teared limb from mole is to atom! Or at least his daughter should be long gone, and humans should be terraforming Mars and be fishing on Jupiters moon Europa by now! But remember that interstellar is just a movie. There are so many theories of black holes, from creation of another universe to space travel.
 
  • #35
Drakkith said:
This is entirely incorrect. As measured by the person aboard the station, the light moves at c, not at 1/2 c. You cannot define velocities relative to light and have any meaningful statement, as light moves at c for ALL inertial observers, no matter what their velocities relative to each other are.
Your completely right, sorry about that. But the argument is still valid via argument correct?
 
  • #36
Jaami M. said:
From the theories I've learned of and from my understanding it's because of the black hole he entered. Now whether it's possible to survive a black hole or not, when he left it he was in the future. This happened because of how time-space Bends and warps around the black hole, because of its Immense Gravitational Field, making "time" also warp. Ultimately making your perceptive relevance to other humans appear to move slower. From my understanding, if he ENTERED a BLACK HOLE, he should be teared limb from mole is to atom! Or at least his daughter should be long gone, and humans should be terraforming Mars and be fishing on Jupiters moon Europa by now! But remember that interstellar is just a movie. There are so many theories of black holes, from creation of another universe to space travel.
molecule*
 
  • #37
Jaami M. said:
Your completely right, sorry about that. But the argument is still valid via argument correct?

What? I don't know what you're asking.

Jaami M. said:
From the theories I've learned of and from my understanding it's because of the black hole he entered.

Yes, the planet they landed on was close to the supermassive black hole, so they experienced a great deal of time dilation relative to the Earth. So much so that something like 20-30 years passed on Earth while they only experienced a few hours.

Jaami M. said:
From my understanding, if he ENTERED a BLACK HOLE, he should be teared limb from mole is to atom!

Not for supermassive black holes. For those the tidal forces near the event horizon are low enough to allow passage without pulling you apart.
 
  • #38
Drakkith said:
Not for supermassive black holes. For those the tidal forces near the event horizon are low enough to allow passage without pulling you apart.

I'm speaking of when he Entered the black hole, not orbiting near it. (going inside the tesseract (from the black hole( on his own)))
 
  • #39
Jaami M. said:
I'm speaking of when he Entered the black hole, not orbiting near it. (going inside the tesseract (from the black hole( on his own)))

You can certainly enter a supermassive black hole without being torn apart by gravity, as I said. What happens beyond the even horizon is unknown.
 
  • #40
Drakkith said:
You can certainly enter a supermassive black hole without being torn apart by gravity, as I said. What happens beyond the even horizon is unknown.
That's true.
 
  • #41
Jaami M. said:
From the theories I've learned of and from my understanding it's because of the black hole he entered.

No; in the movie Interstellar the lead actor goes very close to the horizon of a black hole and stays there for a while, but he never enters the hole (never goes below the horizon). If he had, he wouldn't have been able to come back.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaami M.
  • #42
Everyone... please watch that h this clip and tell me of I'm wrong...-_- he Entered the Black hole...

 
  • #43
Jaami M. said:
Everyone... please watch that h this clip and tell me of I'm wrong...-_- he Entered the Black hole...


Or is that not a black hole? Is it just a wormhole or? What is it
 
  • #44
Jaami M. said:
Or is that not a black hole? Is it just a wormhole or? What is it
It is made up movie nonscience
 
  • #45
phinds said:
It is made up movie nonscience
But remember non-fiction science films become a reality. Flying (planes), digital screens, super computers in our hands, traveling to the moon etc.. It good to know what is to know.
 
  • #46
Jaami M. said:
please watch that h this clip and tell me of I'm wrong...-_- he Entered the Black hole...

He's traveling through a wormhole, which is not the same as a black hole. There are mathematical solutions of the Einstein Field Equation that describe wormholes, but they require "exotic matter", which is not believed to be physically possible to obtain.

Jaami M. said:
non-fiction science films become a reality.

Interstellar is not a "non-fiction science film". It's fiction.
 
  • #47
PeterDonis said:
He's traveling through a wormhole, which is not the same as a black hole. There are mathematical solutions of the Einstein Field Equation that describe wormholes, but they require "exotic matter", which is not believed to be physically possible to obtain.
Interstellar is not a "non-fiction science film". It's fiction.
Lol sorry, I've had 5 hours sleep, I just found this website last night and I've been on it ever since. There's not many people that I can talk to about physics. So when I do it's like coming out of water taking a huge breath in. Lol I should take a break
 
  • #48
PeterDonis said:
He's traveling through a wormhole, which is not the same as a black hole. There are mathematical solutions of the Einstein Field Equation that describe wormholes, but they require "exotic matter", which is not believed to be physically possible to obtain.
You only have to go up to 0:20. But Cooper did travel inside a black hole(Gargantua)
 
  • #49
Jaami M. said:
You only have to go up to 0:20. But Cooper did travel inside a black hole(Gargantua)

No, you have misunderstood somehow. That is NOT what it says.
 
  • #50
Jaami M. said:
But remember non-fiction science films become a reality. Flying (planes), digital screens, super computers in our hands, traveling to the moon etc.. It good to know what is to know.
No they don't. Hollywood is not a research lab.
 
  • #51
And as phinds mentioned above, Interstellar is science fiction, not science fact.
Discussions of it do not belong here in the relativity forum, although there is at least one long thread about the movie in the General Discussion section where non-science is sometimes discussed.

This thread is closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaami M.

Similar threads

High School Gravity and speed of information for orbiting planets
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
High School One-Way Speed of Light
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
6K
Undergrad Speed of Light: Spaceship & Gravity Law Impact
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Undergrad A question about the speed of light and electromagnetism
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Undergrad I want a good reference to a discussion of the meaning of "the speed of light is constant"
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
Graduate 1-Way Speed of Light
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
High School Does Spacetime Have Physical Existence?
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
Undergrad How to Measure Speed of Light & Is It Constant?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Undergrad What is Earth's escape velocity?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Undergrad Can there be a maximum curvature of spacetime?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K