Relative Object Speed Q: Observer Moving or Hula Hoop?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PaulRacer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relative Speed
PaulRacer
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
If you had a stationary hula hoop in space 186,000 miles in circumference with a seat attached to the center spinning at 60rpm with an observer watching the hoop "spin" with no reference point, would this be the same as spinning the outer hoop at 60 rpm and the central observer remaining still? My point is, does the outer hoop have to actually be spinning at the speed of light for it to be observed moving at the speed of light? My explanations always stink so I can try to clarify if necessary.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PaulRacer said:
If you had a stationary hula hoop in space 186,000 miles in circumference with a seat attached to the center spinning at 60rpm with an observer watching the hoop "spin" with no reference point, would this be the same as spinning the outer hoop at 60 rpm and the central observer remaining still? My point is, does the outer hoop have to actually be spinning at the speed of light for it to be observed moving at the speed of light? My explanations always stink so I can try to clarify if necessary.
No, it would not be the same. A similar scenario is to spin around on Earth and watch the moon travel in circles with a coordinate velocity (relative to your head) greater than light speed. The speed of light limit only applies to inertial reference frames.

The hula hoop can spin at any arbitrary speed relative to an accelerated reference frame, but cannot reach the speed of light relative to an inertial reference frame.
 
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