d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Would Like Someone To Explain To Me Ftl > And Why It Can Not Work
Prev123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 15,374
Joined: Mar 26 2008
Gold: 8,009.00
Apr 6 2011 01:17am
Quote (zeratul87 @ Apr 6 2011 02:17am)
oh yeah. ok. i'm sorry just skimmed your post. i couldn't perform the necessary calculations to tell you at what fraction of sol you'd have to perform in order to notice affects from time dilation


np np.
i see what your saying. but its just not what im going for ... today ...
Member
Posts: 9,112
Joined: Sep 2 2007
Gold: 61.00
Warn: 90%
Apr 6 2011 01:18am
Quote (zeratul87 @ Apr 5 2011 11:17pm)
oh yeah. ok. i'm sorry just skimmed your post. i couldn't perform the necessary calculations to tell you at what fraction of sol you'd have to perform in order to notice affects from time dilation


it's theoretical. however AT the speed of light. an object with mass wouldn't be experiencing a change in time. those are the ones belonging to the system (at least afaik)

it would therefore be a matter of knowing the necessary logarithmic function to compare the increase of mass and its affect on time.

This post was edited by zeratul87 on Apr 6 2011 01:21am
Member
Posts: 13,578
Joined: Jul 27 2010
Gold: 2,285.00
Apr 6 2011 01:28am
Quote (djeb081292 @ Apr 6 2011 03:05am)
so your saying all the stuff your wizzing by will appear, thinner/smaller? and that your 'shrinking' the distance your traveling?

well, length only dilates in the direction that you're traveling. Your other two dimensions (the two that are perpendicular to the direction of travel) don't compress at all. But essentially, yes. To you, it looks like the distance that you travel is smaller than what an at-rest observer would see you as traveling.

Quote (zeratul87 @ Apr 6 2011 03:17am)
oh yeah. ok. i'm sorry just skimmed your post. i couldn't perform the necessary calculations to tell you at what fraction of sol you'd have to perform in order to notice affects from time dilation

I don't feel like doing the math atm, but if memory serves, if you travel at 0.75c, then time dilates at a factor of 2.

It's actually a pretty simple calculation. 1 / sqrt(1 - [% of light speed]) = time dilation factor.

So e.g. if you're going 75% light speed, that's 1 / sqrt(1-0.75) = 1/sqrt(0.25) = 1/sqrt(1/4) = sqrt(4) = 2.

edit1: added the reply to djeb
edit2: Damn, I realized I said I didn't feel like doing the math, and then I did the math...

This post was edited by bentherdonethat on Apr 6 2011 01:30am
Member
Posts: 9,112
Joined: Sep 2 2007
Gold: 61.00
Warn: 90%
Apr 6 2011 01:33am
Quote (bentherdonethat @ Apr 5 2011 11:28pm)
well, length only dilates in the direction that you're traveling. Your other two dimensions (the two that are perpendicular to the direction of travel) don't compress at all. But essentially, yes. To you, it looks like the distance that you travel is smaller than what an at-rest observer would see you as traveling.


I don't feel like doing the math atm, but if memory serves, if you travel at 0.75c, then time dilates at a factor of 2.

It's actually a pretty simple calculation. 1 / sqrt(1 - [% of light speed]) = time dilation factor.

So e.g. if you're going 75% light speed, that's 1 / sqrt(1-0.75) = 1/sqrt(0.25) = 1/sqrt(1/4) = sqrt(4) = 2.

edit1: added the reply to djeb
edit2: Damn, I realized I said I didn't feel like doing the math, and then I did the math...


lol well shit you seem to know a lot more than me on the subject. i'll just let you take over from here. :)
Member
Posts: 13,578
Joined: Jul 27 2010
Gold: 2,285.00
Apr 6 2011 01:38am
Quote (zeratul87 @ Apr 6 2011 03:33am)
lol well shit you seem to know a lot more than me on the subject. i'll just let you take over from here. :)

It all seemed right. The only thing I would add is that the relativistic mass increase is really more a product of the fact that Newton's Second Law must be maintained, and without the mass increase, it'd be possible for a single constant force to accelerate anything to light speed and beyond. I don't actually know if mass truly increases or not, but that certainly is the prevailing theory.

edit: F = m*a --> a = F/m. As m --> infinity, a --> 0, so v would approach c as an asymptote. Given infinite time, the object would eventually reach light speed.

This post was edited by bentherdonethat on Apr 6 2011 01:39am
Member
Posts: 5,901
Joined: Dec 13 2005
Gold: 2,508.53
Apr 6 2011 03:06am
It's getting late but this sounds like what I would say go look into. :rofl:

http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-240032.html

Main point was time dilation happens at any speed but does get more prevalent as you reach the speed of light.


Quote (bentherdonethat @ Apr 6 2011 03:38am)
It all seemed right. The only thing I would add is that the relativistic mass increase is really more a product of the fact that Newton's Second Law must be maintained, and without the mass increase, it'd be possible for a single constant force to accelerate anything to light speed and beyond. I don't actually know if mass truly increases or not, but that certainly is the prevailing theory.

edit: F = m*a --> a = F/m. As m --> infinity, a --> 0, so v would approach c as an asymptote. Given infinite time, the object would eventually reach light speed.


This is where perspective comes into Space-Time on the extreme.

Event horizon of a singularity/black-hole.

---

Best I can do with limited time. Have fun researching.
Member
Posts: 34,744
Joined: May 18 2010
Gold: 68.51
Apr 6 2011 06:56am
Quote (bentherdonethat @ Apr 6 2011 02:59am)
In addition to time dilation and the relativistic mass increase, you also have length contraction in the direction that you're traveling. So you'll see yourself travelling at whatever speed that you're traveling at, and you'll see yourself travel a shorter distance in a shorter time compared to what the "at rest" distance and "at rest" time actually were.

Isn't relativity funky?


:thumbsup:
Member
Posts: 15,374
Joined: Mar 26 2008
Gold: 8,009.00
Apr 6 2011 10:00am
Quote (bentherdonethat @ Apr 6 2011 02:28am)
well, length only dilates in the direction that you're traveling. Your other two dimensions (the two that are perpendicular to the direction of travel) don't compress at all. But essentially, yes. To you, it looks like the distance that you travel is smaller than what an at-rest observer would see you as traveling.


I don't feel like doing the math atm, but if memory serves, if you travel at 0.75c, then time dilates at a factor of 2.

It's actually a pretty simple calculation. 1 / sqrt(1 - [% of light speed]) = time dilation factor.

So e.g. if you're going 75% light speed, that's 1 / sqrt(1-0.75) = 1/sqrt(0.25) = 1/sqrt(1/4) = sqrt(4) = 2.

edit1: added the reply to djeb
edit2: Damn, I realized I said I didn't feel like doing the math, and then I did the math...


Sigh,
I dislike that stuff shrinking to your perspective so much, lol
But I guess I'll deal with the right answer
Member
Posts: 14,099
Joined: Jul 13 2006
Gold: 83.30
Apr 6 2011 10:33am
Here is an okay link describing the phenomenon of time dilation and paradoxes:
http://galileo.phys.virginia.edu/classes/252/srel_twins.html
Member
Posts: 15,374
Joined: Mar 26 2008
Gold: 8,009.00
Apr 6 2011 11:46am
Quote (bentherdonethat @ Apr 6 2011 02:28am)
well, length only dilates in the direction that you're traveling. Your other two dimensions (the two that are perpendicular to the direction of travel) don't compress at all. But essentially, yes. To you, it looks like the distance that you travel is smaller than what an at-rest observer would see you as traveling.


I don't feel like doing the math atm, but if memory serves, if you travel at 0.75c, then time dilates at a factor of 2.

It's actually a pretty simple calculation. 1 / sqrt(1 - [% of light speed]) = time dilation factor.

So e.g. if you're going 75% light speed, that's 1 / sqrt(1-0.75) = 1/sqrt(0.25) = 1/sqrt(1/4) = sqrt(4) = 2.

edit1: added the reply to djeb
edit2: Damn, I realized I said I didn't feel like doing the math, and then I did the math...


Is there something supporting that formula, or is it just an accepted theory
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll