Travelling at 0.5c or .43c? Unraveling the Mystery

  • Thread starter Thread starter kaleidoscope
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mystery
kaleidoscope
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
A particle traveling at 0.5c for 1 second covers 1.3E8m (speed=.5*3E8 and gamma=.866) and not 1.5E8. The average speed was then 1.3E8 m/s = .43c and not .5c. What is going on here? Was it travelilng at 0.5c or at .43c?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is relativity.

The particle, from its perspective, travels .5*3e^8m in 1 sec. From your perspective, the particle travels the distance in more time (a lower average speed). Both the particle and the observer agree that it reached a point in space, and disagree on the time it took to get there.

The Lorentz factor (your gamma) tells you the degree of the relativistic effect.
 
kaleidoscope said:
A particle traveling at 0.5c for 1 second at its frame of reference covers 1.3E8m (speed=.5*3E8 and gamma=.866). The average speed was then 1.3E8 m/s = .43c and not .5c. What is going on here? Was it travelilng at 0.5c or at .43c? (Notice that all the calcualtions are done at the particles frame of reference).
By definition the particle's speed in the particle' frame of reference is 0. And yes, it is 0 in one frame and 0.5 c in another and 0.999 c in yet another. There is even a frame where it's speed is 0.43 c, but that is not the particle's frame.
 
kaleidoscope said:
A particle traveling at 0.5c for 1 second covers 1.3E8m (speed=.5*3E8 and gamma=.866) and not 1.5E8. The average speed was then 1.3E8 m/s = .43c and not .5c. What is going on here? Was it travelilng at 0.5c or at .43c?
Suppose you are observing the particles motion over a road And you are stationary above the road. For you the particle covers 1.5E8m on the road in one second. But in the particles perspective, the road moves past a distance of 1.5E8 * 0.866 = 1.3E8m in a time of 1 * 0.866 = 0.866 seconds. So, the particle concludes, the road is moving at 0.5c.

So, Neither the particle nor the road sees any velocity at 0.43c.

BTW 0.866 is 1/gamma. From what I remember, gamma is always greater than 1.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
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