High School Space is Relative: A 17 Yr Old's Exploration

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of "relative space" as introduced in Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time," emphasizing that space is dependent on the observer's reference frame, with all frames being equally valid. Participants clarify that spacetime curvature is influenced by matter and energy, not by an observer's velocity, countering the misconception that velocity affects curvature. The twins paradox is explored, highlighting that for the twins to reunite, one must change course, breaking symmetry and illustrating that relativity does not imply equality. The conversation also suggests further reading, such as "Spacetime Physics" by Taylor and Wheeler, for deeper understanding. Overall, the thread effectively unpacks complex concepts of relativity and spacetime.
greg_rack
Gold Member
Messages
361
Reaction score
79
TL;DR
Since I'm broadly confused :)
Hello everybody, my question may sound stupid, especially speaking of such a mind-blowing and important theory... but here I am!
I'm 17 and I'm reading a fabulous book by Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", and it introduced me to relativity theories... I literally started looking the world differently, it blew my mind!
But anyway, paradoxically, I think I've understood anything about it, apart from one thing: what do they mean with "relative space"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
greg_rack said:
what do they mean with "relative space"?

That "space" depends on your choice of reference frame, since your choice of reference frame determines how spacetime is split up into "space" and "time". There is no unique way to do this because there is no unique choice of reference frame; all reference frames are equally valid.
 
  • Like
Likes greg_rack
PeterDonis said:
That "space" depends on your choice of reference frame, since your choice of reference frame determines how spacetime is split up into "space" and "time". There is no unique way to do this because there is no unique choice of reference frame; all reference frames are equally valid.
Thank you so much, now it's clear!
And also, since spacetime curvature is affected by gravitational fields, how could it be affected by an osberver's velocity(e.g. the twins paradox)?
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
greg_rack said:
spacetime curvature is affected by gravitational fields

It's really the other way around. Spacetime curvature causes gravitational fields (more precisely, it causes particular kinds of "gravitational fields"--other kinds can be produced in flat spacetime by being inside an accerating rocket). Spacetime curvature itself is caused by the presence of matter and energy.

greg_rack said:
how could it be affected by an osberver's velocity(e.g. the twins paradox)?

It isn't. An observer's velocity has nothing to do with spacetime curvature.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and etotheipi
greg_rack said:
I'm 17 and I'm reading a fabulous book by Stephen Hawking, "A Brief History of Time", and it introduced me to relativity theories... I literally started looking the world differently, it blew my mind!

Pick up a copy of Spacetime Physics by Taylor and Wheeler if you want to begin to understand relativity.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and kent davidge
greg_rack said:
And also, since spacetime curvature is affected by gravitational fields, how could it be affected by an osberver's velocity(e.g. the twins paradox)?

For the twins to meet again at least one of them have to change his/her course. It could break symmetry between them. Relativity does not always mean equality.

Let her twin get on a merry-go-round and him twin wait at the gate. It takes time T for one around.
On arrival her time is
\sqrt{1-\frac{V^2}{c^2}}\ T = \sqrt{1-\frac{R^2 \Omega^2}{c^2}}\ T = \sqrt{1+\frac{2\Phi}{c^2}} \ T
where R the radius, ##\Omega=\frac{2\pi}{T}## angular velocity, ##\Phi=-\frac{1}{2}R^2\Omega^2## potential energy per mass of centrifugal force which is zero at the center of merry-go-round. She and he agree with their time difference. He in IFR interprets it is due to time dilation by Lorentz transformation with V. She, not in IFR, interprets it is due to potential ##\Phi## in her FR. In his IFR she rotates and in her FR he rotates relatively. IFR or not makes difference.
 
Last edited:
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K