The importance of the relative movement

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhyHunter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Movement Relative
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the significance of relative movement and observer knowledge in the context of special relativity. Participants explore how motion is perceived differently by various observers and the implications of these perceptions on understanding relativistic effects such as time dilation and length contraction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that special relativity emphasizes the relativity of all motion, with the speed of light as the only constant, leading to phenomena like time dilation and length contraction.
  • One participant discusses the necessity of using radar to measure relative motion, highlighting that an observer can only determine motion after making measurements based on reflections of signals.
  • Another participant questions the importance of understanding motion in special relativity, prompting a discussion on the nature of motion, including constant velocity and acceleration.
  • There is a contention regarding the concept of absolute velocity and inertial reference frames, with some arguing that no single frame is privileged, while others emphasize the reciprocal nature of relative motion.
  • Examples are provided, such as the motion of a rocketship relative to Earth, to illustrate how different observers perceive motion based on their chosen reference frames.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of motion and the implications of special relativity, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on the complexities of inertial versus non-inertial frames and the challenges in defining motion without an absolute reference, which may lead to unresolved questions about the nature of relative motion.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the foundational concepts of special relativity, the nature of motion, and the implications of observer-dependent measurements may find this discussion relevant.

PhyHunter
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Relative movement or Observer knowledge about motion
Are these things important about special relativity
If its important,why and how?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's VERY important...SR tells us everything is ' relative'...the only constant is the speed of
light. So all inertial observers record the same 'c' for lightspeed. This happens because space and time 'conspire' together, change together in such as way that while they are dynamic [changing] depending on relative speed, good old 'c' remains the speed of light. This is called 'time dilation' for time changes and 'length contraction' for distance changes.

As a simplistic example, if you are right alongside a house and a friend is a mile away how do you compare observations about the size of the house?? You think the house is' big', she thinks both you and the house are 'small' ...what is correct? what is real? both views are ok but different.**You need some sort of a transform, an adjustment, to reflect your different positions. To adjust for such heights, you can figure comparisons using the tangent and separation for the distant observer relative to the adjacent observer. In relativity this gets more complicated since distance and time are not constant...so Lorentz transforms have been found to be the appropriate corrections at high speeds, but less than c, when space time is flat [no gravity].Different observers at high relative speeds are in fact separated not by fixed time and fixed distance but by the Lorentz transforms. Lorentz transforms are the mathematics to make ‘adjustments’ to bring distant observers together: their apparently different individual measurements [ observations] will then agree. The Lorentz transform is the relativistically-correct transform from one flat-spacetime reference frame to another when the relative velocities of the two frames is smaller than c...so they apply to particles with mass, not to light..which is massless.
 
PhyHunter said:
Relative movement or Observer knowledge about motion
Are these things important about special relativity
If its important,why and how?

Thank you
What's important is movement or motion of an Observer (or any other object) relative to an Inertial Reference Frame.

An Observer only has knowledge of the motion of another Observer or object after the fact, that is, sometime later when he can actually make a measurement of his own motion relative to some other Observer/object or the motion of another Observer/object relative to himself. He needs to use radar to make those measurements which means he has to send out his radar signals long enough prior to their reflection off the other Observer/object that they can make the round trip and get back to him so that he can make his calculations about the positions of the Observer/object as a function of his time and thereby conclude their motion. This is especially easy to do when we limit the positions of all Observers/objects to be in line.
 
Why is it important to know that we do not move in special relativity?
 
Why is it important to know that we do not move in special relativity?

What do you mean? We do 'move'. One type of motion is constant velocity, another is acceleration where speed or direction of velocity changes. SR handles both.

Are you referring to the fact that in SR there is no absolute velocity, no absolute inertial reference frame.? If so, the importance is that my velocity relative to you is the reciprocal
of you velocity relative to me. In other words, you attribute relative motion to me, I attribute
it to you. Using the term inertial reference frames, IRF, we are each at rest in our own IRF but see the other person and his IRF in motion. So I attribute kineticenergy of that motion to you, you attribute it to me.

Example: A rocketship whizzes past earth...which is in motion, the ship or the earth? It depends on which IRF you choose to use, no one IRF is special...none is 'priviliged' is language sometimes used to describe that. A ship observer sees Earth moving, an Earth observer sees the ship moving, a moon observer sees both moving. [This example suffers a bit because especially the Earth and moon, for example, are accelerating around each other as the orbit...that is not really an inertial frame of either.]

So an issue in SR is always 'what frames are inertial' [constant velocity] and when not, are the effects of non inertial motion small enough to ignore?

PS: If you SEARCH in these forums for 'special relativity' [top of this page] you'll find other very similar discussions. And most importantly, you'll find different people explain things using different language and different perspectives. THAT's when you can begin to get a really good feel for what is being posted.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 85 ·
3
Replies
85
Views
8K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K