Special Relativity Question (for a paper)

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion on special relativity, the focus is on calculating the arrival time of light from a moving object. The traveler perceives the distant star as approaching at 0.5C, leading to confusion about whether to integrate this motion into light's travel time. The calculation shows that light takes 0.5 years in the stationary frame, but the moving observer's perspective complicates this, suggesting a total time of 0.433 years. The question arises whether the speed of light's constancy is already factored into these transformations or if a new calculation is needed due to the star's motion. Ultimately, the participant seeks clarity on the correct approach to determining light's arrival time in relation to the motion of the distant object.
NotAName
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
SR, Do you calculate closing speed to determine light arrival time?

Please evaluate the paragraphs below... what I'm most concerned about the very last statement. Do I integrate the "motion" of the distant object to determine the arrival time of light or is that already in the calculation?

Thanks in advance!

According to SR, a traveller going to a star .5 lightyears away at .5C takes 1 year according to the stationary frame but the traveller only records .866 as much time elapsing for a total of .866 years to arrive. The traveller believes himself to be stationary and that the distant object is approaching at .5C from a distance of .433 lightyears away.

According to SR, a beam of light traveling to that distant star would take .5 years in the stationary frame and would take .433 years in the moving frame less the movement of the distant star for a total of .2165 years according to the moving observer.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this too simple of a question? I'm surprised nobody cares to answer.
 
It's not that it is too simple, it's just not clear what your question is. What do you mean by "integrate the motion"? What "motion" function are you talking about?
 
I'm sorry, I used bad terminology. I was just asking if the transformation already included the speed of light in it and it would therefore take .433 years total for light to reach the distant point.

Or should I calculate that light should reach the distant point at an effective 1.5C because the distant point is closing on my location.

And I further confused it by fat fingering the calculation... should have been .288 not .2165 (oops!)

Thanks
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top