We seem to have lost the image of the LVT equation in the above post.
For reference, it is the 'reverse transformation' equation in this link: Lorentz Velocity Transformation
I was referring to the 40 year trip at 1G with a return 56000 years later I mentioned in post 4803. I suppose for that to work with a return just 50 years later the acceleration would have to be much greater on a much shorter trip.Sorry, I don't see the significance of your question in relation to the topic of time dilation that we were just discussing.
So at say 5G, gone for 1 month(that's accelerating for 1 week, decelerating for 1 week, then turning around and doing the same back to Earth...one month total trip), how much time would have passed relatively?
No, not relative to some central observer...relative to each other.Galu, you are editing your posts so rapidly, I am losing track....
You mentioned the Lorentz velocity transform at some point.
Discopete was talking about two particles at 2/3 lightspeed relative to some central observer.
So v relative = 4/3 divided by 1 + 4/9
Which is 12/9 divided by 9/9 + 4/9 if I follow.
Which is 12/13.
Is that the answer?
I didn't edit the post, the image of the equation which appeared at first in my post got rejected somehow. I have now linked to the source of the equation for reference (see my previous post).Galu, you are editing your posts so rapidly, I am losing track....
You mentioned the Lorentz velocity transform at some point.
I calculated the relative velocity (with no help from Discopete!) as 12c/13, or 0.92c. Therefore we are in agreement.
Sorry, I am unable to do relativistic calculations involving acceleration followed by deceleration on both an outward and return trip.
Perhaps someone may be able to, but I suspect the physics is much more complicated (and perhaps more surprising!) than just a a one way, constant acceleration journey.
We have wasted 3 pages on schoolboy physics here. Because special relativity is schoolboy physics. Buy a book if you want to know. Learn to do integrals. But not a productive field for me. I am not interested in starships and aliens.
An Amazing Discovery
Now THAT is more interesting.
I have no idea what it might feel like to get hit by a high energy cosmic ray, beyond previous mention that it might feel like a bright flash in the brain with neutrinos or gamma rays when supernovas go off. But it must happen now and then. People operating ammunition dumps might worry too.
An Amazing Discovery
Now THAT is more interesting.
I have no idea what it might feel like to get hit by a high energy cosmic ray, beyond previous mention that it might feel like a bright flash in the brain with neutrinos or gamma rays when supernovas go off. But it must happen now and then. People operating ammunition dumps might worry too.
That's it? No tally?We have wasted 3 pages on schoolboy physics here. Because special relativity is schoolboy physics. Buy a book if you want to know. Learn to do integrals. But not a productive field for me. I am not interested in starships and aliens.
An Amazing Discovery
Now THAT is more interesting.
I have no idea what it might feel like to get hit by a high energy cosmic ray, beyond previous mention that it might feel like a bright flash in the brain with neutrinos or gamma rays when supernovas go off. But it must happen now and then. People operating ammunition dumps might worry too.
Can a five sense intelligent being with mass understand the experience of a particle without mass?
Physics gives an understanding that a photon can be emitted, absorbed; interacts with itself, other particles, EM field and gravity field. But possess no knowledge about the capability of a photon to observe in an intelligent five sense fashion.
+1Well, thanks for that nosism. Sorry to have wasted his majesty's time!
Obnoxious majesty, indeed.
To look at this intuitively, consider the following analogy remembering there are two things to keep in mind: velocity and the rate of passage time. You are in a hypothetical spaceship A that can accelerate and travel up to c. On another planetary system, hypothetical space ship B launches at the same time. Lets assume they mirror each others speeds exactly and they are aimed to hit each other half way in between the two planetary systems.
You start your journeys slowly and your on board clocks are for all intents and purposes in sync with the clocks you left behind where you launched from. You then start accelerating until you are at an appreciable fraction of c. The onboard clocks have slowed wrt the ones left behind when the journeys began. On the video link back to your respective home planets, your beautiful wife turns old before your eyes. Looking out the the window you notice planets and stuff whizzing past you.
As you get to c, time for you has completely stopped but everything around you is moving at or near c, including life on Earth. Because time for you has stopped, your perception is that you have also stopped - you cannot tell that you are moving anymore and are in effect stationary from your perspective. An observer on a planet you are passing however will see you whizzing by at c.
You look out the window, and see the other spaceship coming at you t c. Unfortunately the two of you collide; massive explosion since E=mc^2 and each spaceship weighs 10 tons.
The closing speed was not 2c but simply c because depending on whose doing the observing, one of you was stood still and the other was moving at c and vice versa.
So, nothing can travel faster than c and if two objects travelling at c collide head on, the closing speed is c
Last edited:
See C, Amigo.
Si! Si? Sigh. The worst part of a bad burrito is hours later. Many or few innocent people and other sentient beings passing by may be aware that something is wrong, somewhere. but, nowhere exactly, see? Even that burrito eater may not be impressed, due to the wayward wind that just wants to wander. See?
Si! Si? Sigh. The worst part of a bad burrito is hours later. Many or few innocent people and other sentient beings passing by may be aware that something is wrong, somewhere. but, nowhere exactly, see? Even that burrito eater may not be impressed, due to the wayward wind that just wants to wander. See?
Okay, I get that. However, would the impact of their collision be the same if one were stationary being hit by the other?
Since Steve was unable to quantify that for you, I decided to do the necessary calculation.
High energy particles arrive at the Earth's surface at a rate of 10,000 per square metre per second.
Since the average surface area of a man's body is 1.9 square metres, he would therefore intercept 19,000 particles per second.
Given that there are 86,400 seconds in a day, the daily total of particles intercepted would equal 1,641,600,000.
Last edited:
I still haven't become a mathematician, but I think it would be the same impact as if one were stationary, and the other was travelling at C. In my opinion, because two C velocities can't sum. The total impact would be limited to the maximum of
1 x C.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.