Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math - Physics Forum

Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 11-05-2003, 02:39 PM
Paul Cardinale
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

[Only registered users see links. ] (Jeff Root) wrote in message news:<964c68dd.0311040747.74ed6140@posting.google. com>...

Correct.


Depends what you mean by "the effect". Time dilation is a function of
velocity.
But the rapid advancement observed at the turnaround occurs because of
the turnaround, which of course goes hand-in-hand with the
acceleration.


To find the relationship between the observed rate of advancement and
acceleration, differentiate the LT with respect to t and solve for t'.

Paul Cardinale
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 11-05-2003, 03:16 PM
stmx3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

Richard wrote:
[snip]

SR deals only with inertial frames...no acceleration, no gravitation...
only space and time coordinates. But there are an infinite number of
these frames relative to an observer. If you were to enumerate these
frames (the primed (') frames) with respect to an observer's frame (the
O frame),then they can be specified by their translated coordinates
(includingthe coordinate including time (ct). Furthermore, if there is
a relativevelocity between these frames and the O frame, then O would
observe their spacetime diagrams to not be Euclidean, as his is.
Rather, the primed axes are "rotated" inward such that they are no
longer perpindicular (at least according to O). Instead, they form an
angle theta = tanh^-1(v/c). You can easily draw the events on these
Minkowski diagrams and see that there is a difference in durations and
distances (i.e. an object stationary in O has a vertical line...yet it
is not "vertical" in the primed frame...i.e. it is in motion). This
is how I prefer to look at it...time dilation becomes more intuitive
with these diagrams. Pardon the crudeness of my diagram:

ct ct'
| .
|
| .
| / <-- c (=1)
| . /
| /
| . /
| / . x'
| . / .
| / .
|/ .
|.____________________x

Finally, because physics is the same for all inertial frames AND because
the speed of light is constant in all inertial frames, clocks must
necessarily run differently (as observed from one frame to another). If
you accept these two postulates from Einstein then you should see that

1) events simultaneous in one frame are not in another
2) time dilation occurs
3) length contraction occurs

Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 11-05-2003, 03:33 PM
Dirk Van de moortel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math


"stmx3" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:[Only registered users see links. ]...

Update at:
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=bi75vd$qbm$[Only registered users see links. ].edu
[Only registered users see links. ]
http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=a3M1b.82977$[Only registered users see links. ] net-ops.be
Enjoy...

Dirk Vdm


Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 11-05-2003, 05:49 PM
stmx3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
[snip]
Argh! Here I am propagating the meme! In my defense, I verified my
statement
prior to posting with Ch. 10 of
[Only registered users see links. ]
(so I inherited that meme from....you?) ;-)

Thanks for keeping me straight. You are a wealth of information and
your presence here is appreciated by me.

Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 11-05-2003, 08:01 PM
Dirk Van de moortel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math


"Richard" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:[Only registered users see links. ]...

I'm not interested in what was argued by Einstein.
I asked you to explain your setup with an unambiguous
diagram. If you can't do it, just say that you can't do it.

Dirk Vdm


Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 11-05-2003, 10:28 PM
Paul B. Andersen
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math


"stmx3" <[Only registered users see links. ]> skrev i melding news:[Only registered users see links. ]...

I don't think the book states that "SR deals only with inertial frames".
(I am not sure, though. I haven't read it thoroughly.)
I states that the postulates of SR is valid only in inertial frames.
That's no different from Newtonian mechanics.
Newton's laws of motion (as they normally are formulated) are
valid only in inertial frames.

But both SR and NM can be used to describe what will happen
observed in accelerated frames.
Or in rotating frames, like the ground frame.

Paul


Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 11-06-2003, 01:10 AM
Jeff Krimmel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:50:47 -0600, Richard wrote:

[...]


[...]

It has yet to to be proved that it doesn't contradict empirical facts that
haven't been obtained yet?

What?

Jeff

--
Add an underscore between 'd' and 's' for email.

Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 11-06-2003, 01:53 PM
stmx3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

Paul B. Andersen wrote:

In the introductory paragraphs, the 2nd from the last paragraph says

" Special Relativity may be divided into two topics, *kinematics*
and *dynamics*. Kinematics deals with lengths, times, speeds, etc. It
is basically concerned with only the space and time coordinates, and not
with masses, forces, energy, momentum, etc. Dynamics, on the other
hand, does deal with these quantities."

Obviously, I ran with kinematics, treating it as all of SR. So, you are
right about the text.

I think I'll limit my posts since I've lately been retracting and
correcting most of them. But I'm glad my misconceptions are being
expunged.

Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 11-06-2003, 02:37 PM
Dirk Van de moortel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math


"stmx3" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:[Only registered users see links. ]...

It would *not* have been a meme from me, indeed ;-)


Making mistakes can be a bit confusing for those you
are trying to help, but for yourself (and for them) it is
a good way to learn (if you don't mind being corrected
of course).

I guess one has to find a balance between:
"making mistakes + confuse audience + learn"
and
"making no mistakes + help audience + stagnate".
Specially if you count in the possibility of not being
corrected and thus helping the proliferation of bad
memes ;-)
Can be difficult indeed.


Nah.... just put a bit straight...
Expunging is reserved for the trolls and for the
arrogant ones ;-)

Cheers,
Dirk Vdm


Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 11-06-2003, 07:03 PM
stmx3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Time dilation - No Need to Do the Math

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
[snip]

(I don't want to be *too* contrite in any one post)


In truth, I've had all this in the past...but I'm one of those physics
majors that ended up on a non-physics track. Use it or lose it. I
lost it. At least I misplaced it and am trying to dig it out from all
the junk that's accumulated in my mental attic.


I at least like to acknowledge I've made a mistake, especially when
done while trying to help the audience. And surprisingly I've suffered
nary a whip or a scorn.

[snip]

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
dilation , math , time


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moving Dimensions Theory Book Due Out in Fall 05--Very Rough Draft: 4th Dimensions Expanding Relative to 3 Spatial Dimensions jollyrogership@yahoo.com Physics Forum 64 03-31-2012 10:24 AM
Simply put, MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY is THE NEW MODEL: http://physicsmathforums.com drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 0 08-29-2006 06:32 AM
Moving Dimensions Theory!! Rock On!! drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 1 07-06-2006 05:19 PM
Does any of this make sense ??? Yrael Physics Forum 3 09-12-2005 03:11 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.20902 seconds with 16 queries