What is the physical cause behind time dilation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the physical cause of time dilation, exploring its theoretical underpinnings and implications within the framework of special relativity. Participants examine the relationship between the constancy of the speed of light and the passage of time, along with various interpretations and explanations of these phenomena.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that time dilation is fundamentally linked to the constancy of the speed of light in all inertial frames, suggesting that this relationship is a key physical phenomenon.
  • Others argue that time dilation does not have a mechanistic explanation and is a consequence of the inability of two observers in relative motion to agree on both the speed of light and the passage of time.
  • A participant highlights the relativity of simultaneity as a crucial concept for understanding time dilation, emphasizing that different observers perceive time differently based on their relative motion.
  • Some contributions suggest that time dilation can be likened to geometric interpretations, such as comparing the measurement of time to a ruler placed diagonally on graph paper, indicating that different frames define time in slightly different directions in spacetime.
  • There is a discussion about whether time dilation is influenced by the time taken for light signals to reach an observer, with some participants clarifying that time dilation remains after accounting for signal delay.
  • Several participants express frustration with introductory materials that may mislead readers into thinking that signal delay has physical significance in the context of time dilation.
  • Some participants share recommendations for books on special relativity, indicating a desire for resources that present the material without overly rigorous mathematics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of time dilation and its underlying causes. While some agree on the importance of the speed of light, others challenge the clarity of its relationship with time dilation, leading to an unresolved discussion with multiple competing perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion may be complicated by the lack of consensus on definitions and interpretations of key concepts, such as simultaneity and the implications of spacetime geometry. The conversation reflects a range of assumptions and perspectives that are not fully reconciled.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and enthusiasts of physics, particularly those seeking to understand the conceptual foundations of special relativity and the implications of time dilation.

  • #31
Mister T said:
Ask yourself what physical phenomenon is responsible for the fact that the reading on a clock changes continuously?
Still in the analog world, are we?:wink:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Mister T said:
Ask yourself what physical phenomenon is responsible for the fact that the reading on a clock changes continuously?
If you want to know that, ask me, Sorcerer... because the answer is ~MAGIC!~
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
  • #33
Jazzyrohan said:
I know that things do not actually change size in their reference frames but only is observed to be doing so. I am asking if time dilation occurs due to the time taken by the light to reach us or something of that sort.

I like the perspective it's the geometry of spacetime; however that is one step after the most favored irreducible reply, that c is invariant. Am surprised no one mentioned causality. That's a fun one to think of as being the cause of time dilation / length contraction.

For a simply put book on SR, Relativity (a brief insight) by Russell Stannard is one I like. He put's a fair amount of emphasis on measurement (in turn perspectives); which I find important when developing an understanding of the concept in general.
 
  • #34
Rap said:
There's no physical phenomenon, its a point-of-view phenomenon. It's like asking "when I look at circle head-on, it looks like a circle, but when I view it from an angle, it looks like an ellipse. What is the physical phenomenon which causes this?"

Different inertial frames have different "points of view", they divide spacetime up into space and time in different ways. People in different inertial systems disagree about the time between two events in the same way people viewing a circle at different angles will disagree on what it looks like. They both understand why they disagree, just as relativity explains why two inertial systems may disagree.

There's also the Block Universe interpretation:
The physical phenomenon is not that one looks at a physical 3D object from a different point of view, but rather that one observes a different cut through a physical 4D 'spacetime' object.

(To follow your circle/ellips comparison: the ellips is not a different view of the circle, but a cut at a different angle though a cylinder)
 
Last edited:
  • #35
nitsuj said:
I like the perspective it's the geometry of spacetime; however that is one step after the most favored irreducible reply, that c is invariant. Am surprised no one mentioned causality. That's a fun one to think of as being the cause of time dilation / length contraction.

For a simply put book on SR, Relativity (a brief insight) by Russell Stannard is one I like. He put's a fair amount of emphasis on measurement (in turn perspectives); which I find important when developing an understanding of the concept in general.

I would have mentioned causality and other things but I was too busy to comment and the thread has gone on for a while now.
But since you mentioned causality...
I would say that the big idea in relativity and spacetime, at the deepest level, isn't the Lorentz group but it is the causal structure.
And there are some interesting papers along these lines.

"Causality Implies the Lorentz Group"
Journal of Mathematical Physics 5, 490 (1964); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1704140
E. C. Zeeman

"A contribution to chronogeometry"
Canad. J. Math. 19(1967), 1119-1128 https://cms.math.ca/10.4153/CJM-1967-102-6
A. D. Alexandrov

"Zeeman topologies on space-times of general relativity theory"
Communications in Mathematical Physics, October 1976, Volume 46, Issue 3, pp 289–307 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01609125
Rüdiger Göbel

and likely what first inspired this line of thinking was

"The Absolute Relations of TIme and Space" (1921) and "The Geometry of Time and Space" (1936)
https://archive.org/search.php?query=creator:"Robb,Alfred+A."
A.A. Robb ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Robb )
where he used the notion of "after" (a partial order relation) to try to "derive" Minkowski spacetime.
Robb introduced the notion of "rapidity" is relativity.
His "Optical Geometry of Motion" (1911) https://archive.org/details/opticalgeometryo00robbrich is surprisingly insightful for 1911, just a few years after Minkowski (1907) and Einstein (1905). You can see aspects of the radar method in it.
 
  • #36
Grinkle said:
It sounds like you are invoking a mechanical metaphor by using the word rotation, but I can't follow what you are saying (and I am not implying that is your fault). Can you clarify?
"Hermann Minkowski developed the concept of three-dimensional space combined with time to form a four-dimensional space-time. The importance of this concept is that... the effect of relative movement... appears in the same manner as does the effect of a rotation in three-dimensional space." -- Dr. Ron Davis
 
  • #37
David Lewis said:
appears in the same manner as does the effect of a rotation in three-dimensional space."
Coordinate transformation for rotation is given by, say ##\theta## is rotaion angle,
x'=x\ cos\theta + y\sin\theta
y'=-x\ sin\theta + y\cos\theta
which satisfies the relation
x'^2+y'^2=x^2+y^2Similarly that of boost is given by, say ##\theta=\frac{v}{\sqrt{1-v^2}}## where dimensionless v is ##v=V/c##
ct'=ct\ cosh\theta + z\sinh\theta
z'=-ct\ sinh\theta + z\cosh\theta
which satisfies the relation
c^2t'^2-z'^2=c^2t^2-z^2

cosh and sinh are hyperbolic cos and hyperbolic sin.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: David Lewis
  • #38
EDIT
For boost
tanh\theta=v=V/c,
\theta=tanh^{-1}v
 
  • #39
It is just an explanation of how the space-time coordinate system that we perceive and measure things in works. I don't know if you want to call that a physical thing or a mathematical thing.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
EDIT^2 to post#37
z'=ct\ sinh\theta+z\ cosh\theta
 
  • #41
"It is sometimes said that length contraction occurs because objects rotate into the time axis. This is actually a half truth, there is no actual rotation of a three dimensional rod, instead the observed three dimensional slice of a four dimensional rod is changed which makes it appear as if the rod has rotated into the time axis. In special relativity it is not the rod that rotates into time, it is the observer's slice of the worldtube of the rod that rotates." https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special_Relativity/Simultaneity,_time_dilation_and_length_contraction
 
  • #42
A bit of a necropost (revival of a old thread, where the OP has most likely moved onto other topics) here , the latest post being on july 25 2019, the previous post on Nov 4 2018.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 79 ·
3
Replies
79
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K