relativity of Motion

[HeXeN]

I very well might see...so this could only be used to tell whether something has undergone acceleration or not?

[Radical Edward]

I don't quite understand what you are getting at there. be careful you don't muddle up SR and GR.

[HeXeN]

Did that once.....but what im saying is is that according to what jakiri said, that acceleration has to be involved, one could tell by the readings on the chronographs which body had accelerated.

However, i'd figure that acceleration would be the same as static motion in the sense that one would be unable to say which body were accelerating...

 

In those experiments, which one read slower? the chronograph on the craft or the one on earth?

[Radical Edward]

nope, acceleration is a different case. if you imagine trying o perform an experiment in an accelerating frame, the results will change. say you drop a ball in a car that is at constant velocity, to you, it will seem to drop straight down, and the same will happen to someone who is standing next to the road. now imagine your car is accelerating. as soon as you drop it, the vehicle will still be accelerating in the horizontal direction but the ball won't, and in the car, you will see the ball move to one side as it falls.

[swansont]

HeXeN said in post #28 :

In those experiments, which one read slower? the chronograph on the craft or the one on earth?

 

The one that was moving with respect to the earth ran slower than the one that was fixed.

 

But, as has been mentioned, in some of these experiments, GR effects were also present - clocks that move to a weaker gravitational potential will run faster, and that may end up being the larger effect. (and there is also the Sagnac effect present because we're in a rotating coordinate system)

 

To clarify about the acceleration - if the clocks were compared during the experiment, each one would see the other as running slow. It is only because one clock was accelerated to move fast and again accelerated to slow down that it ends up running slower than the fixed clock. There need not be any measurable GR effects for this to hold.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

You know, on Star Trek when the Enterprise came to Earth, the captain should become older than all his superiors because of this effect.

[Radical Edward]

younger.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

oops. I mean, all of his kids (does he have any?) would be older than him.

[Sayonara]

Cap'n Refsmmat said in post #31 :

You know, on Star Trek when the Enterprise came to Earth, the captain should become older than all his superiors because of this effect.

The primary function of the warp bubble is to bypass the relatavistic problems of instellar travel.

[JaKiri]

Sayonara³ said in post #34 :

The primary function of the warp bubble is to bypass the relatavistic problems of instellar travel.

 

Trouble is, impulse power gives you a speed which will produce relatavistic effects.

[Sayonara]

True. Full impulse is meant to be 0.25C (lol).

 

Although maybe it's possible to still create a weak warp bubble that... oh never mind. You're the physics monkey, you explain possible scenarios to me

[JaKiri]

Why not have Einsten Compensators?

[Sayonara]

Well, that's a good answer, but there's no evidence for those

[HeXeN]

Buncha trekkies

[Janus]

Sayonara³ said in post #36 :

True. Full impulse is meant to be 0.25C (lol).

 

Then there's no problem the gamma factor at .25c is 1.03, which means that Picard would have to travel at full impulse for 100 yrs in order for his Earth superiors to age 3 more years than him. Not a real noticeabe effect. However it does mean that The Enterprise most likely had to readjust its clocks everytime it traveled at impulse for any length of time.

[Sayonara]

Iirc they use some kind of beacon or subspace relay for synching system times.

 

(Possibly TNG: "Cause and Effect"...)

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Never seen that one... I'm watching a different one now.

Picard is turned into a Borg.

Anyway, do you think there is such a thing/is possible as a warp bubble (outside Star Trek)?

[Sayonara]

Ahhh, Best of Both Worlds

Cause and Effect rocks.

 

You could make a bubble that does the same thing and call it warping.

 

No idea how though.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

That's the name?

Maybe you could warp the spacecraft! That's warping enough! (ha ha! yeah right!)

[HeXeN]

you guys DO know that star trek is NOT real......right?

[Sayonara]

But physics is, and we give things names to make them easier to refer to.

[JaKiri]

Sayonara³ said in post #46 :

But physics is, and we give things names to make them easier to refer to.

 

Yes, but most of it's bollocks.

 

That aside, I don't see why you can't have arguments based on fictional situations; surely that's what every debate is about?

[Sayonara]

Most of what is bollocks?

 

I don't see any reason why we can't have arguments based on the ST universe, as long as we agree on a common frame of reference and use the rules as they appear in that universe.

[JaKiri]

ST universe, wrt real physics.

 

Note that I clarified the situation in my follow on bit.

[HeXeN]

Well anyways the project is due tomorrow and im workin on it now, just thought i'd let you guys know, and thanks for all the help, every post that i used has its own individual entry in my bibliography =)

 

I bet my teacher is gonna have a time trying to figure out what i mean when i say the author is "radical edward." =)