Special Relativity - Time Dilation and Length Contraction

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving a two-part problem related to Special Relativity, specifically time dilation and length contraction. The participant correctly identifies that a velocity of 0.86c results in a time dilation factor (gamma) of 2, meaning a moving clock runs at half the rate of a stationary clock. Additionally, they apply the length contraction formula, concluding that the length of an object moving at this velocity would also be halved. The participant's calculations are confirmed as accurate, reinforcing the relationship between velocity, time dilation, and length contraction in Special Relativity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Special Relativity concepts
  • Familiarity with the Lorentz factor (gamma)
  • Knowledge of time dilation and length contraction equations
  • Basic algebra skills for solving equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Lorentz transformations
  • Explore practical applications of time dilation in GPS technology
  • Learn about the implications of length contraction in high-speed travel
  • Investigate the effects of relativistic speeds on mass and energy
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching Special Relativity, and anyone interested in the implications of high-speed travel on time and space.

erok81
Messages
454
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I have a two part question where one has to solve for a velocity to make a moving clock run half the rate as one at rest. Then the second part is what velocity would an object have to move in order to make its length halved.

Homework Equations



t'=t\gamma

L=\frac{L_{0}}{\gamma} where L0 is the object at rest.

\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\beta^{2}}}

The Attempt at a Solution



I chose gamma to be equal to two. That way, using my equations above, the time would run slower by half and the length the same.

Is this an incorrect way of thinking for this problem? I have both problems with the same velocity, 0.86c. I thought it kind of odd that a two part question would have the same answer so I am really doubting what I've solved for.

Am I close?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct. Maybe their goal was to make you second guess yourself :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
3K