Time, speed and mass

[Mace]

Is there an explanation for the fact (according to Einstein) that time is slower if you move faster, and, an explanation on why the mass grows when you move faster. I know that the explanation is in Einstein’s theory of relativity, but I am trying to find an easier comprehendible explanation, maybe someone here can give a link or spell it out for in eatable terms.

 

I now see it as this:

Everything is moving with the speed of light all the time in spacetime, and this speed can move in the 4 dimensions (3 directions and time). (I don’t know if this has been tried before)

Therefore if I accelerate in a space direction, my speed in time must slow down. Because my speed in spacetime MUST be the same (would this view compromise what relativity claims?)

 

If the claim above makes sense, then maybe the reason for the mass growth lies here too. Staying on the spacetime idea think about this.

 

When we read the explanation about curved space, with the planets on a gigantic rubber mat that curves according to the mass of the planet/star (I hope u know what I mean). We see that a big mass makes a deep impression in the mat, and a small mass makes a small impression.

 

What if:

The impression is bigger if the mass is on the point of spacetime for a longer period of time, is this why the mass grows? I mean the mass has a speed near the speed of light (maximum speed in space), and I would think that the curve in space is moving so fast, that nothing would feel it passing. But if the speed in the fourth dimension has almost stopped because of the above claim of shared speed in time and space, then the mass moving very fast in space has a longer time to bend the spacetime around itself, and the mass will seem higher for an onlookers point of view.

 

Did I miss something, please enlighten me, and tell me what you think of my idea. Is it all rubbish, or is some of it maybe a useful way to understand time, speed and mass?

 

/Mace

[InfiniteNow]

It's all rubbish, mostly because of assumptions and misuse of terminology, but you're not alone in your confusion. We're having t-shirts made. Be sure to order one. :)

 

http://www.npl.co.uk/publications/einstein/index.html

http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/aphyrel.html

 

 

And if you really want to get all into it:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

[Little Bang]

It's called relativity because it is always relative to the observer. If you and I are in two different space ships traveling in the same direction from earth and our velocity with respect to earth is 99.9 C an observer on earth will see us as having gained a great deal of mass and our clocks almost stopped. Yet when we observer each other we well notice no changes with respect to the other ship.

[InfiniteNow]

Another good place to solidify one's foundation:

 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/time/

 

Einstein's first major contribution to the study of time occurred when he revolutionized physics with his "special theory of relativity" by showing how time changes with motion. Today, scientists do not see problems of time or motion as "absolute" with a single correct answer. Because time is relative to the speed one is traveling at, there can never be a clock at the center of the universe to which everyone can set their watches. Your entire life is the blink of an eye to an alien traveling close to the speed of light. Today, Newtonian mechanics have become a special case within Einstein's theory of relativity. Einstein's relativity will eventually become a subset of a new science more comprehensive in its description of the fabric of our universe. (The word "relativity" derives from the fact that the appearance of the world depends on our state of motion; it is "relative.")

 

Sagan: A profound consequence of Einstein's special theory of relativity is that no material object can travel as fast as light. It is forbidden. There is a commandment: Thou shalt not travel at the speed of light, and there's nothing we can do to travel that fast.

 

The reason this is connected with time travel is because another consequence of special relativity is that time, as measured by the speeding space traveler, slows down compared to time as measured by a friend left home on Earth. This is sometimes described as the "twin paradox": two identical twins, one of whom goes off on a voyage close to the speed of light, and the other one stays home. When the space-traveling twin returns home, he or she has aged only a little, while the twin who has remained at home has aged at the regular pace. So we have two identical twins who may be decades apart in age. Or maybe the traveling twin returns in the far future, if you go close enough to the speed of light, and everybody he knows, everybody he ever heard of has died, and it's a very different civilization.

[Mace]

So the mass i observe when i sit in the ship does not change?

 

How about the amount of energy i need to consume to accelerate lets say 10 km/sec, if my mass is the samme, nomatter my speed, i can always use the same portion of energy to accelerate 10 km/sec?

 

If that is true, will it not then(seen from the ship) seem like speed at some point will exceed 'C'? if i start at speed 0 and does an 10 km/sec acceleration 100000 times?

 

:) I gues im gonna need one of them T-Shirts InfiniteNow :lol:

 

/Mace

[InfiniteNow]

There is a concept in economics that applies here as well called the law of diminishing returns. The faster you go, the more your relativistic mass (not rest mass). Think about how heavy you feel when you're in a fast car and the driver stomps on the gas pedal. Your relativistic mass is impacted by the acceleration... it increases (not your rest mass though).

 

The more massive you get, the more energy it takes to accelerate you further. Just think. It takes much more energy to move a jumbo jet than to move a crayola crayon due to their differences in mass. So, as you approach the speed of light, you approach infinite relativistic mass, and there's not enough energy to accelerate you any further.

 

Wiki has a pretty good article on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity

 

Admittedly, some of it is beyond my training and I may be using some inappropriate terms here. I'm trying to paraphrase based on my understanding of what I've read.

 

 

 

Cheers. :)

[Jay-qu]

you have done well at explaining InfyNow, but I think you missed the point on that last one.

 

The flaw is that LittleBang said that anything that is at the same velocity relative to yourself wont lot like its changed in mass, size or experienceing time dilation. SO then if it is all uneffected then you should be able to use your x amount of fuel to accelerate 10km/s, and once youre going that 10km/s faster everything relative to you looks the same.. nothing appears to have a mass increase so you use that same x to increase your velocity by another 10km/s.. and so on. Clearly this is flawed in some way, because you cant. but why?

[Qfwfq]

SO then if it is all uneffected then you should be able to use your x amount of fuel to accelerate 10km/s, and once youre going that 10km/s faster everything relative to you looks the same.. nothing appears to have a mass increase so you use that same x to increase your velocity by another 10km/s.. and so on. Clearly this is flawed in some way, because you cant. but why?

Each time you say "increased by another 10 km/s" what exactly does that mean? 10 more than which velocity? :)

[Jay-qu]

I see.. I hear that its all very logical, but just hard to see.. Im off to think.

[InfiniteNow]

Thanks J and Q (:shrug:) for your clarifications... or, supplements/corrections to my post. I'm still in training. B)

 

 

The reaction I am having to the comments you are making keep reminding me of the reaction I had when I read that Photons have no time.

 

To the best of your knowledge, do these topics overlap somehow in more than just my own perception of them?

[Jay-qu]

Its all relative :lol: I mean relativity :lol: of the special kind.

[Mace]

I still like my idea that everything is moving along with the speed of light, and all momentum gained in space is lost in time

 

Everything is moving with the speed of light all the time in spacetime, and this speed can move in the 4 dimensions (3 directions and time). (I don’t know if this has been tried before)

Therefore if I accelerate in a space direction, my speed in time must slow down. Because my speed in spacetime MUST be the same (would this view compromise what relativity claims?)

 

But I have been reading a little more on different theories, and I see that the above looks like McCutcheon's 'Expansion Theory' and I find that idea way off, because it tries to shed light on the flaws of relativity and the makes up new and even stranger assumptions. (the idea of orbiting objects is a big patch in my eyes).

But is there no way to see things as moving along the 4 dimensions with a constant speed, a speed that they share between them (without the accelerating expansion). I know InfiniteNow (no offense meant) is not happy at all with the idea, but is there anyone that can make any sense out of it? I don’t see why it can’t be so, if it makes sense to what we can observe.

 

/Mace

[Jay-qu]

This is true, it has already been stated. This is why time dilation occurs, as your velocity increases in space it decreases in time. Like running a 100m race on an angle, increasing the angle as it tends towards 90 degrees, you will run a near infinite length just to make it the 100 in a near perpendicular direction. Sorry if that didnt make to much sense, a diagram could be useful here.

[Mace]

It makes perfect sense, and i like the analogy to a two dimensional world, it is a little easier to compehend. That is exatly the way i pictuer it in my mind.

But is it a fact that your overall speed always is 'C' and that most of the momentum just happends to be in the fourth dimension.

 

If it is, then is the speed of light not realy the speed of time, or am i wrong to seperate the two...

 

I mean looking on the two dimensions again(like a map), going forward, only depends for me, what way my nose is pointing, not if im going North or West.

 

Its just harder to picture that i point my nose more in the direction of time, than to the North.

 

hmm, i think im gonna need :) to get this to sink in...

 

This again means that there never is anything like acceleration, only change of direction:confused:

 

/Mace

[Jay-qu]

Well I to am reaching my limits of my understanding of relativity, but I do know that it always has to come back to the fact that your velocity has to be measured relative to something elses. So as I think it is fair to say your velocity through spacetime is always going to be c but just split up into the componants of 4-space, it still has to be relative to something, does it not?

[Mace]

I guess the problem is to make the relativity comprehensible in the same way as the two dimensional perspective of the 100 m race…

I find I very hard to picture the 100 m race relative, could someone maybe help me fill the gap.

 

Is a 100 m race longer/shorter if I am looking at it while moving past it?

Does the 100 m race take a longer/shorter period of my time if I move very fast?

 

From what I understand of relativity all distances (time included) become shorter at greater speeds, until ‘c’ is reached. If a traveller could ever reach speed ‘c’, he would see the whole universe as a singularity. Because he would feel no time pass, and feel no distance before or after him, no matter where he turned to go. The distance of a 100 m race would then be the same as the distance to the other side of the universe, and the time to travel it would be the same too… zero.

 

But then, what happens if the traveller should come to a ‘perfect’ standstill. Would the universe then truly be everlasting, in both distance and time span? Would the 100 m race be a race with no end? Would it even ever start? And would it last forever? :hihi: :) :confused:

 

I think I will leave it here for a while, it is very confusing, and thinking about it makes it even more confusing…:doh:

[Jay-qu]

Ok I made a diagram that should help a bit

 

If you follow the red path you are only doing the 100m but if you follow the blue you do 100m in a vertical sense and another componant in a horizontal sense.

 

The analogy is that as you get an increasing velocity you start to travel less in the componant of the time dimension and more in the componant of the spacial dimension. Hence on the diagram the vertical represents time and the horizontal space. At c your line on that diagram would be totally horizontal, as at c you only travel through space and not time.