Looking for 'absolute still' with time dilation

In summary, it would appear that looking for an 'absolute still' reference frame would be a way to measure the CMBR more accurately while also determining a better value for 'absolute still'.
  • #1
Labyrinth
26
0
I looked through this thread here regarding how fast we're moving relative to the CMBR, but I wonder if it would be hypothetically possible to get an even better measurement while also looking for a decent value for 'absolute still' using the apparent asymmetry of time dilation/constriction.

A hypothetical 'still' entity would appear to be moving rapidly to us, but if we were to attach a clock to it a comparison would reveal that we're moving and it is being more 'still' since its time would appear constricted by comparison yes?

Say that we're traveling at an average direction x at our 'home' velocity (all velocities averaged together for the Earth). An object 'A' traveling in an opposite -x direction would be effectively 'slowing up', just like if you're on a freeway going 60 next to a car matching your speed and they put on their brakes they will appear to move 'backwards'.

Then another object 'B' could move in different directions and speeds around object 'A' comparing clocks to look for an even more 'still' reference frame.

Is this possible or do I have a fundamental misunderstanding of time dilation and relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Labyrinth said:
Is this possible or do I have a fundamental misunderstanding of time dilation and relativity?

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of time dilation and relativity. There is no "absolute still" (or, as it is usually called, an "absolute rest frame"). The frame where the CMBR is isotropic is no more and no less special than any other frame.
 
  • Like
Likes Labyrinth
  • #3
Going into more detail, all the observations of time dilation and length contraction are symmetrical: If Bob sees Alice moving w/r to Bob's rest frame, then he'll observe Alice's clocks as slowing down. At the same time, Alice sees Bob moving in her rest frame and, according to her, it's Bob's clocks that are slowing down.

In your example, the first mistake was to assume that Earth has got some velocity x without specifying with respect to what reference frame. Next, you switched to Earth's rest frame and assumed it was special - that objects A and B moving with respect to Earth are time dilated and Earth as seen from A or B isn't.

Furthermore, there is no such thing as time contraction in special relativity. Time of all moving objects passes more slowly (is dilated) than time in the observer's rest frame.

There is a time acceleration effect in general relativity (due to gravity), but that's got nothing to do with motion.
 
  • Like
Likes Labyrinth
  • #4
Dang, so there is no asymmetry here with the velocity in the way that I was thinking, and we can't tell 'who is moving fast' and 'who is moving slow' since there is no absolute rest frame.

We could via dilation/contraction be able to tell who is in a substantial gravity well, but that's not particularly useful as this would usually be really obvious.

What's worse is I found some threads that explained this after I posted, even though I had searched the forum. Dreadful.

Thanks for your time guys.
 

FAQ: Looking for 'absolute still' with time dilation

1. What is "absolute still"?

"Absolute still" refers to a hypothetical state in which an object is completely motionless. This means that the object has zero velocity and does not experience any acceleration.

2. What is time dilation?

Time dilation is a phenomenon in which time passes at different rates for objects that are moving at different speeds or are in different gravitational fields. According to Einstein's theory of relativity, time is not constant and can be affected by factors such as speed and gravity.

3. How does time dilation relate to finding "absolute still"?

The concept of time dilation is related to the search for "absolute still" because the two are interconnected. In order to achieve absolute stillness, an object would have to have zero velocity, which would also result in time dilation. This is because the object would be moving at a speed close to the speed of light, causing time to pass slower for the object compared to an observer on Earth.

4. Is it possible to achieve "absolute still" with time dilation?

According to our current understanding of physics, it is not possible to achieve "absolute still" with time dilation. This is because an object would need to have infinite energy to reach the speed of light, which is not physically possible. Additionally, the concept of "absolute still" is a theoretical concept and has not been observed or proven to exist.

5. What are the implications of finding "absolute still" with time dilation?

If "absolute still" were to be achieved with time dilation, it would have significant implications for our understanding of physics and the universe. It would challenge the fundamental principles of relativity and open up new possibilities for time travel and space exploration. However, as mentioned earlier, it is currently not possible to achieve absolute stillness with time dilation, so these implications remain theoretical.

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
88
Views
4K
Replies
45
Views
4K
Replies
34
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Back
Top