Speed of Light Dilation: Does Observer See Slower Beam?

Zman
Messages
96
Reaction score
0
I am interested to know if the following special relativity scenario is generally accepted in physics.

Consider a spaceship that is traveling close to the speed of light relative to some observer.
The time on the space shift will run more slowly than that of the observer.

If a light beam is emitted from the space ship, will the observer see the light beam travel more slowly than light in the same frame of reference as the observer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The observer will always measure the light as moving at c relative to himself. This is one of the two postulates of Relativity.
 
The reason I asked is that I was watching a science program on BBC1 'Bang goes the theory' last week and they stated that light would seem to go slower in the scenario mentioned.
I would have assumed that they would have had expert advisors and that such an error wouldn't have been broadcast to the nation.
 
Zman said:
Consider a spaceship that is traveling close to the speed of light relative to some observer.
The time on the space shift will run more slowly than that of the observer.

If a light beam is emitted from the space ship, will the observer see the light beam travel more slowly than light in the same frame of reference as the observer?
No, the light beam will travel at c. Don't forget, in addition to the time dilation there is also length contraction and relativity of simultaneity.
 
Consider a spaceship that is traveling close to the speed of light relative to some observer.
The time on the space shift will run more slowly than that of the observer.

The time of the observer as seen from the spaceship also appears to run slower. Each observes the other's time as running slower.
The only possible way to tell who might be traveling "fast" and whose time might be relatively slower is by who has felt the force from acceleration...and by appropriately comparing elapsed clock times..
 
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