What am I Missing Here? Play from 3:00

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of time dilation when traveling at the speed of light and how it relates to the "twin paradox". It is stated that time would pass slower for someone traveling at the speed of light compared to someone on Earth. However, it is pointed out that it is impossible to travel at the speed of light and trying to reason about it leads to contradictions. The "twin paradox" is mentioned as a way to test this concept using atomic clocks on jets. The conversation also touches on the idea of time being relative and the flaw in the reasoning of the paradox.
  • #1
skyshrimp
39
78
Play from 3:00



It states that we will age slower if we were traveling at the speed of light compared to being on Earth. Would we not age the same but just be further away hypothetically?

Next it states that if we travel away from a clock at the speed of light at 12:00, we would always see 12:00.

Surely the initial 12:00 would instantly become a fading memory and you would only see black, as no more photons would reach the eye as you would be moving at the same speed as the photons.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
skyshrimp said:
It states that we will age slower if we were traveling at the speed of light compared to being on Earth. Would we not age the same but just be further away hypothetically?
You can't travel at the speed of light - it's impossible and trying to reason about what happens if you do travel at the speed of light inevitably involves self-contradiction and nonsense.

If you travel somewhere near the speed of light relative to the Earth and return (the returning part is important) then yes, you will experience less time than someone who stays on Earth. That's strictly true even at low speeds, but you need high quality atomic clocks to detect the difference even at airline speeds. The experiment is usually called the "twin paradox", and is easily googleable (and there are a billion threads on it here). It was first actually tested by Hafele and Keating.
skyshrimp said:
Surely the initial 12:00 would instantly become a fading memory and you would only see black, as no more photons would reach the eye as you would be moving at the same speed as the photons.
Again, you can't travel at the speed of light and trying to discuss it leads to nonsense. You can travel at a very high speed relative to the clock, though, and you are correct that you will barely be able to see the clock because light will be extremely redshifted. This is simply a relativistic version of the Doppler effect, familiar from the change in pitch of a siren as an emergency vehicle passes by. The relativistic version has a few interesting features that aren't relevant here, so is qualitatively similar to the non-relativistic version.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes skyshrimp
  • #3
You need to read up on the twin paradox where one twin is placed on a spaceship and travels away at a high rate of speed say 1/2 speed of light while the other waits anxiously on Earth. When the spacefaring twin returns he/she will have aged less than the twin on Earth. This is a tested fact using atomic clocks on jets.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox

Its also called a paradox because students who study it think the spacefaring twin could just view the other twin on Earth as speeding away at 1/2 speed of light so that time is relative and neither really age.

The flaw in the reasoning is that the spacefaring twin must slow down, turn around and return. In that slowing down ie he/she changes to a new inertial frame of reference and thus the ages are forever changed with the Earth bound twin aging more quickly than the spacefaring twin. It can be shown via spacetime diagrams and light pulses that this is so.

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes YoungPhysicist

Related to What am I Missing Here? Play from 3:00

What is the context of the question "What am I Missing Here? Play from 3:00"?

The question is usually asked in the context of a video or audio recording where the speaker or performer mentions something that was previously discussed or shown at the 3:00 minute mark.

Why is the question usually asked at the 3:00 minute mark?

The 3:00 minute mark is often a significant point in a video or audio recording, as it is one quarter of the way through a 12-minute segment. This is a common time for new information or developments to be introduced.

What is the purpose of asking "What am I Missing Here? Play from 3:00"?

The purpose of the question is to clarify any confusion or gaps in understanding that may have arisen during the recording. It allows the speaker or performer to revisit and explain any important points that may have been missed.

How does asking this question contribute to the scientific process?

Asking this question promotes critical thinking and encourages the speaker or performer to provide further explanation or evidence to support their claims. It also allows for a deeper understanding of the topic being discussed.

What are some potential follow-up questions to "What am I Missing Here? Play from 3:00"?

Some potential follow-up questions could include: "Can you provide more detail about this point?", "How does this information relate to the overall topic?", or "Is there any additional evidence or research that supports this idea?"

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
612
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
296
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top