Understanding Time Dilation in Special Relativity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion surrounding time dilation and the Lorentz transformation in special relativity. A user struggles with calculating the time coordinate for an event in a moving frame, resulting in a negative time value, which raises questions about the interpretation of past events. It is clarified that a negative time does not imply the event is unobservable, as it simply indicates it occurred before the observer's current time. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the distinction between "observing" an event and its temporal coordinates in relativity. Overall, the key takeaway is that negative time values can be valid in relativity, reflecting the event's occurrence in the past relative to the observer's frame.
Orad
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
See, I've just started taking this class, and evne though I've already read books by Martin Gardner and Brian Greene, I don't understand any of this stuff... well, not any. But my math seems to be wrong.

I have 2 frames, S and S', such that t=t'=0 and x=x'=0.
Event A occurs in frame S at tA=0.3 microseconds, xA = 150 m.
Frame S' moves at a velocity of +0.65c (where c is 3x10^8 m/s, by our convention)

I don't not understand what to do, but when I do the full lorentz transformation calculation, I end up with a negative time for t'A. Am I miss-interpretting the question or the answer? Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I haven't performed the calculation, but why is it a problem if t'A is negative?
 
Well, if t is negative, that means the event is in the past, for the observer, right? Doesn't that mean he never observed it? I figure it doesn't mean the same thing as saying it's 3 meters in the negative x direction, as you can look back and see it, but if it's the past.

Although, now that you mention it, since this observer's (S') moving so quickly, he's already seen the event and moved on by the time the observer in S sees it.

So I miss-interpretted the answer...?
 
I just did a quick run through the calculation. I could have made a mistake, but I, too, get t'_A to be negative.

There is nothing magical or mystical about this. For example, if I choose here and now to be the origin of my spacetime coordinates, what is the time coordinate of something that happened yesterday, like the landing of the space shuttle?

Also, be careful with way "observe" is used in relativity. It doesn't mean the same thing as "actually see happen."
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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