Tampering with the speed time theory when driving.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Can you explain what you mean by "reverse dilation"?

topsemag55

The link you gave said the astronauts aged. Coming back to Earth - thus decelerating - wouldn't that reverse the effects of relativity, or am I reading it wrong? Or would traveling back intoa gravitational field at the same speed you left it reverse the effect?

No. It's not acceleration that causes time dilation; it's speed. Deceleration decreases the rate at which you age differently than your surroundings, but it doesn't reverse anything.

There is one way you can reverse things, though, which is to clear Earth's gravitational field such that the Earth carries on without you. In that case, the people on Earth (even those at rest with respect to the Earth) are moving faster than you from your frame of reference, so you will be aging faster than them. That's why some of the astronauts in that article were found to have aged more rather than less.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Not very much, but still a measurable amount.

magicalclick

I still need the article about them using atomic watch though. This link could be purely based on calculation instead of obseration. Any reference you care to share about the real atomic watch and so on? :)

I can't seem to find it, will let you know if I do.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Not very much, but still a measurable amount.

topsemag55

Even still, an amazing read, to have actual evidence of time dilation upon human beings.:)

So traveling at Mach 34 to escape Earth's gravity does cause time dilation.

I wonder, if an object orbiting Earth contacts the upper atmosphere and starts to incur orbital decay and atrmospheric re-entry(such as Skylab), does reverse dilation occur? Is there a cutoff speed for time dilation?

About the cutoff speed, we'll need a velocity u such that u is sufficiently large (With an upper bound of c of course) enough for Lorentz factor to be lesser than 1, which will make the Lorentz factor positive and greater than one for time dilation to take place. I doubt that we'll have an exact value for the cutoff, according to Wikipedia (Not a primary soruce, I know) speeds at around 1/10 are sufficient for any observable time dilation. Technically, time dilation would occur even at speeds like 90 mph, it's just that it's small enough to be negligible.

Well, I could be wrong. I haven't been doing this for awhile.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Can you explain what you mean by "reverse dilation"?

GabuEx

The link you gave said the astronauts aged. Coming back to Earth - thus decelerating - wouldn't that reverse the effects of relativity, or am I reading it wrong? Or would traveling back intoa gravitational field at the same speed you left it reverse the effect?

No. It's not acceleration that causes time dilation; it's speed. Deceleration decreases the rate at which you age differently than your surroundings, but it doesn't reverse anything.

There is one way you can reverse things, though, which is to clear Earth's gravitational field such that the Earth carries on without you. In that case, the people on Earth (even those at rest with respect to the Earth) are moving faster than you from your frame of reference, so you will be aging faster than them. That's why some of the astronauts in that article were found to have aged more rather than less.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Not very much, but still a measurable amount.

saltsoap

Even still, an amazing read, to have actual evidence of time dilation upon human beings.:)

So traveling at Mach 34 to escape Earth's gravity does cause time dilation.

I wonder, if an object orbiting Earth contacts the upper atmosphere and starts to incur orbital decay and atrmospheric re-entry(such as Skylab), does reverse dilation occur? Is there a cutoff speed for time dilation?

[QUOTE="saltsoap"][QUOTE="topsemag55"]

Even still, an amazing read, to have actual evidence of time dilation upon human beings.:)

So traveling at Mach 34 to escape Earth's gravity does cause time dilation.

I wonder, if an object orbiting Earth contacts the upper atmosphere and starts to incur orbital decay and atrmospheric re-entry(such as Skylab), does reverse dilation occur? Is there a cutoff speed for time dilation?

UbiquitousAeon

Fixed it.

And to think Einstein thought this through without ever having left the planet. An amazing man.

topsemag55

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

[QUOTE="magicalclick"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Not very much, but still a measurable amount.

GabuEx

I still need the article about them using atomic watch though. This link could be purely based on calculation instead of obseration. Any reference you care to share about the real atomic watch and so on? :)

I can't seem to find it, will let you know if I do.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

And to think Einstein thought this through without ever having left the planet. An amazing man.

GabuEx

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

I just now read about him, where his Nobel Prize in Physics was for his relativity theory, yet they officially granted it for the photoelectric effect, because his theory was considered "controversial" in 1921.:P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="magicalclick"]

I still need the article about them using atomic watch though. This link could be purely based on calculation instead of obseration. Any reference you care to share about the real atomic watch and so on? :)

jimmyjammer69

I can't seem to find it, will let you know if I do.

No, that's something else; I could have sworn there was something similar like that but with astronauts, but I can't seem to find it. Maybe faulty memory, I'm not sure.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

And to think Einstein thought this through without ever having left the planet. An amazing man.

GabuEx

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

Mathematics seems to be rather uncannily useful in physics, doesn't it? Einstein's mathematical predictions seem to reconcile with empirical observations very well. For a good read on the topic, look up for Eugene Wigner's article on The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

And to think Einstein thought this through without ever having left the planet. An amazing man.

topsemag55

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

I just now read about him, where his Nobel Prize in Physics was for his relativity theory, yet they officially granted it for the photoelectric effect, because his theory was considered "controversial" in 1921.:P

Yeah, technically speaking he actually never received a Nobel Prize specifically for his contributions to the theory of relativity. The reason for this, of course, was that a large portion of the scientific community thought he was completely nuts until they were all proven wrong. :P

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

I can't seem to find it, will let you know if I do.

magicalclick

Interesting read. So, does atomic clock 100% robust? Meaning, if I give pressure, heat, and verious forces, would it be affected? Or to be exact, is atoms consistant after applying external forces?

Yes (to questions #1 and #3, no to #2). Atomic clocks operate on a fundamental property of atoms.

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

GabuEx

I just now read about him, where his Nobel Prize in Physics was for his relativity theory, yet they officially granted it for the photoelectric effect, because his theory was considered "controversial" in 1921.:P

Yeah, technically speaking he actually never received a Nobel Prize specifically for his contributions to the theory of relativity. The reason for this, of course, was that a large portion of the scientific community thought he was completely nuts until they were all proven wrong. :P

So what if I was flying around the earth at the speed of light for one year earth time, how much time will have passed for me?

Mystic-G

Absolutely none.

I admire him for the fact that he was offered the position of running Israel, yet he turned it down. There are some very good pictures of him in the Wikipedia article, including one showing him taking the Oath of Citizenship in the U.S. in 1940. He really enjoyed the academic freedom America provided him.:)

topsemag55

I often wonder why his older pictures are the most iconic, instead of his younger pictures where he didn't look like a crazy hobo. :P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

I just now read about him, where his Nobel Prize in Physics was for his relativity theory, yet they officially granted it for the photoelectric effect, because his theory was considered "controversial" in 1921.:P

topsemag55

Yeah, technically speaking he actually never received a Nobel Prize specifically for his contributions to the theory of relativity. The reason for this, of course, was that a large portion of the scientific community thought he was completely nuts until they were all proven wrong. :P

Then again, there's this.

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

So what if I was flying around the earth at the speed of light for one year earth time, how much time will have passed for me?

Barbariser

Absolutely none.

Well that's not really correct; the correct answer is... it's terribly undefined. If someone were travelling at the speed of light, then from their perspective:

- The distance between them and every other point in the universe would be zero; and

- The rest of the world would be aging at an infinite rate.

In short, you'd be tripping more balls than the biggest LSD aficionado in the world. :P

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

And to think Einstein thought this through without ever having left the planet. An amazing man.

saltsoap

There were a number of predictions Einstein made that seemed bizarre but proved to be true. Another one, if I recall correctly, was that the gravitational pull of planets would cause light to bend. This came as a rather strange suggestion considering that it was believed that light had no mass, but indeed it was later shown to be completely true.

Mathematics seems to be rather uncannily useful in physics, doesn't it? Einstein's mathematical predictions seem to reconcile with empirical observations very well. For a good read on the topic, look up for Eugene Wigner's article on The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics.

I often wonder why his older pictures are the most iconic, instead of his younger pictures where he didn't look like a crazy hobo. :P

GabuEx

:lol:

That is so sig-worthy.:P

You could have a pic of Einstein with that quote in a sig...entirely original.:)

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

So what if I was flying around the earth at the speed of light for one year earth time, how much time will have passed for me?

GabuEx

Absolutely none.

Well that's not really correct; the correct answer is... it's terribly undefined. If someone were travelling at the speed of light, then from their perspective:

- The distance between them and every other point in the universe would be zero; and

- The rest of the world would be aging at an infinite rate.

In short, you'd be tripping more balls than the biggest LSD aficionado in the world. :P

A mathematical description of it seems to be much more intuitive at times.

At the speed of light, the factor (u/c)^2 in the Lorentz factor becomes 1, and the Lorentz factor will become 1/0, which is undefined. Regardless of the time taken, the fact that you travel at the speed of light makes the resulting time dilation to be undefined.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

I often wonder why his older pictures are the most iconic, instead of his younger pictures where he didn't look like a crazy hobo. :P

topsemag55

:lol:

That is so sig-worthy.:P

Well I mean how would you like to be remembered, like this:

Or like this:

[QUOTE="topsemag55"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

I often wonder why his older pictures are the most iconic, instead of his younger pictures where he didn't look like a crazy hobo. :P

GabuEx

:lol:

That is so sig-worthy.:P

Well I mean how would you like to be remembered, like this:

Or like this:

I see your point.:P

omg...you got me...can't stop laughing. An alternate sig for Gabu: Pics of Einstein along with your quote. Hugely original.:P

:o Why has Gene Wilder never portrayed Einstein. Or would that be Einsteen?

In short, you'd be tripping more balls than the biggest LSD aficionado in the world. :P

GabuEx

Well, I think you'd have to worry more about having an infinite kinetic energy which would mean that if you so much as touch something, you'll end the universe.

:o Why has Gene Wilder never portrayed Einstein. Or would that be Einsteen?

jimmyjammer69

Well going by his pronounciation it would have to be "Eensteen", which by all accounts is definitely an awesome name.

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

[QUOTE="Mystic-G"]

So what if I was flying around the earth at the speed of light for one year earth time, how much time will have passed for me?

GabuEx

Absolutely none.

Well that's not really correct; the correct answer is... it's terribly undefined. If someone were travelling at the speed of light, then from their perspective:

- The distance between them and every other point in the universe would be zero; and

- The rest of the world would be aging at an infinite rate.

In short, you'd be tripping more balls than the biggest LSD aficionado in the world. :P

This is rather confusing.

Even though the distance between them and every point is 0 in their own reference frame. The distance of the person relative to another location measured by an observer would remain finite?

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

:o Why has Gene Wilder never portrayed Einstein. Or would that be Einsteen?

GabuEx

Well going by his pronounciation it would have to be "Eensteen", which by all accounts is definitely an awesome name.

Either way, he was pretty much born to play the role ca. Willy Wonka, judging by that first picture.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="Barbariser"]

Absolutely none.

saltsoap

Well that's not really correct; the correct answer is... it's terribly undefined. If someone were travelling at the speed of light, then from their perspective:

- The distance between them and every other point in the universe would be zero; and

- The rest of the world would be aging at an infinite rate.

In short, you'd be tripping more balls than the biggest LSD aficionado in the world. :P

This is rather confusing.

Even though the distance between them and every point is 0 in their own reference frame. The distance of the person relative to another location measured by an observer would remain finite?

Well length contraction and time dilation are two sides of the same coin; the reason why people going faster age at a lesser rate is because they quiite literally travel less distance than other people. So the answer to your question is that other observers would see this person take up 100% of the space in the universe.

Anyways, what I said is just the interpretation of the relativistic equations of time and length for v = c; there are other problems that would prevent that from ever happening, such as the increase in mass (which would make it necessary for there to be an infinite force to accelerate something to the speed of light).

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="jimmyjammer69"]

:o Why has Gene Wilder never portrayed Einstein. Or would that be Einsteen?

jimmyjammer69

Well going by his pronounciation it would have to be "Eensteen", which by all accounts is definitely an awesome name.

Either way, he was pretty much born to play the role ca. Willy Wonka, judging by that first picture.

Yeah, now that you mention it if you gave him a mustache I could absolutely see it.

These help to make sense of the whole thing.

http://galileoandeinstein.physics.virginia.edu/more_stuff/flashlets/lightclock.swf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7vpw4AH8QQ&feature=PlayList&p=8B688FA0262B7DD8&playnext_from=PL&index=0&playnext=1

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

As I stated, astronauts whose watches were synchronized with a clock upon launch were found to have slightly slow watches when they returned.

There is objective, empirical observed evidence for the relativistic nature of time.

Gabu, your post grabbed my interest. Objects orbiting the Earth (and those that accelerate enough to escape gravity for a moon landing) travel fairly fast. Do you know how much of a time differential the astronauts incurred as a result of their travels?

It's hilarious how much ignorance there is in this thread. I mean it's pretty much agreed upon in the scientific community. A lot of textbooks have it, it's been proven with atomic clocks... I mean what does it take to prove it to you people?

So what if I was flying around the earth at thespeed of lightfor one year earth time, how much time will have passed for me?

Mystic-G

We can't even answer this, because nothing with mass can travel at or over the speed of light.

[QUOTE="Blubadox"]

There is no such thing as time, why do you want to chase it? It's a state of mind, to identify time you need two events- a preceding and a succeeding one.

Brainkiller05