Whom do we consider as moving in special theory of relativity?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of motion in the context of the special theory of relativity, particularly focusing on the relativity of simultaneity and time dilation as experienced by two observers in relative motion. Participants explore the implications of these concepts on determining which observer is considered "moving" or "standing still."

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how to determine which observer is moving or standing still, questioning how to decide whose clock should be considered delayed.
  • Another participant asserts that there is no preferred rest frame, indicating that both observers can validly claim the other's clock is ticking slower.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that the laws of physics remain consistent across different frames of reference, reinforcing the idea that both observers see the other's clock as time dilated.
  • One participant mentions that the perception of time dilation is linked to the loss of simultaneity, suggesting that this phenomenon arises from relative motion and position.
  • Another participant challenges the explanation of simultaneity as a cause, stating it is an observer-dependent phenomenon rather than a causal factor.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the interpretation of simultaneity and its implications for determining motion. Multiple competing views remain regarding the nature of time dilation and the relativity of simultaneity.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of defining motion in relativity, including the dependence on reference frames and the unresolved nature of simultaneity in the context of relative motion.

jason_bourne
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
hey guys... i have understood the part of special theory of relativity where they explain why the time slows down for a guy moving with greater speed.. or atleast i think i have understood. But the problem is that suppose two guys are in the space one guy is moving at a high speed and the other one is standing still .. so according to the theory the one whos moving his clock should go slow than the one who is standing in one place... but the point is as to which person should i considered moving or standing or moving according to normal relativity concept.. i may consider the one standing as moving and vice versa .. so wen they compare their watches whose watch should have delayed? how one decides this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's no preferred rest frame. They are both right when they say that the other guy's clock is ticking at a slower rate. (If you think this can't possibly be true, you are wrong. Check out the threads about the twin paradox if you want to know more).

By the way, what a clock measures is the "length" of the path it takes through space-time, with "length" defined in a funny way. You add up contributions of the form [itex]\sqrt{dt^2-dx^2}[/itex] along the path, so movement in "space" makes the path shorter.
 
The whole point of "relativity" is that it does not matter. The laws of physics are the same and will give the same result no matter which frame of reference you take.

(Notice, here, each person saying that the other person's clock is ticking slower is the "same result".)
 
the reason that each is able to see the other as time dilated is that there is a loss of simultaneity.

i wrote a long explanation of this but nobody responded.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=236978
 
granpa said:
the reason that each is able to see the other as time dilated is that there is a loss of simultaneity.

i wrote a long explanation of this but nobody responded.
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=236978
If it requires a long explanation it's probably wrong. Simultaneity is an observer dependent phenomenon and is an effect of relative motion and position. It is not a cause of anything.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
5K