Learn Japanese with JapanesePod101.com

View topic - Say something about the member above you.

Say something about the member above you.

NO SPAM ALLOWED! Discuss stuff not related to Japan or Japanese. The rules are the same in this forum as in the other forums.

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby goku8851 » Thu 01.11.2007 3:28 pm

two_heads_talking wrote:
paul_b wrote:
two_heads_talking wrote:
if one were to remain stationary and one were to travel 8 light years.. 20 years would pass for the stationary twin while only 12 would pass for the travelar.. and even in all this they would meet up in same time and place ..

Dude, your maths sucks. That would only be the case if the one that travelled 8 light years did so at the speed of light.

Assuming that the travelling twin was travelling for the entire 20 years, further assuming that said twin's acceleration vector was always directly away or directly towards the origin point and that said acceleration was always at the same magnitude determine how much time passed for the travelling twin.

Show your workings.


IT ASSUMES THE traveler was travelling at 80% of light speed. and this is the best place to see what i am talking about..

In the case that the traveler was going that fast then you are correct. The clock of the stationary person would be running faster than the person going 80% the speed of light. To understand this, picture a particle of light bouncing between two mirrors. Lets say that when the particle hits one side and returns to its original position amounts to one second. When you start to move the mirrors, the distance the partical increases because the path of travel is no longer horrizontal but is diagonal thus taking more time to complete one cylce which I defined to be one second. That is why the person moving will seem to be have a slower time than the moving person. So the numbers two_heads_talking used are correct if you are moving with a velocity close to the speed of light. But in the case of my original example, I said they were drifting which implies they were not moving close to the speed of light so the numbers would not be as large as two_heads_talking said.
There are two great things about politics. One is the money and I forgot the other.
goku8851
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat 01.06.2007 10:50 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby Chris Hart » Thu 01.11.2007 3:33 pm

Goku enjoys discussing physics.

Mike -
I'll join your bet. I bet it will happen on page 6.
-.. .   -.- -.-. ---.. ..- ..-. ...-

I am nerdier than 97% of all people. Are you a nerd? Click here to find out!
User avatar
Chris Hart
 
Posts: 577
Joined: Wed 07.05.2006 3:36 pm
Location: 未確認飛行物体

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby CajunCoder » Thu 01.11.2007 3:51 pm

Chris Hart - Puts me to shame with his superior level of Geekiness!

Off topic, but I find it interesting that everyone assumes such theories as fact. Time is nothing more than a man-made concept to measure change. Why should less change happen because one is travelling faster? And why is light speed the magic point where this begins happening? Would it not happen on a smaller scale as well?

Of course, I realise I am ignorant on this subject. I just enjoy things challenge things, rather than blindly accepting them because some scientist is supposed to know better :P As smart as a scientist may be in technical fields, I find they have a general trait of getting too far into the specifics, and losing perspective of the big picture.

Perhaps I should do some research on this subject before giving my not-so-well-founded opinion on it, though :D
Last edited by CajunCoder on Thu 01.11.2007 4:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
CajunCoder
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue 09.27.2005 4:08 am

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby two_heads_talking » Thu 01.11.2007 4:02 pm

goku8851 wrote:


In the case that the traveler was going that fast then you are correct. The clock of the stationary person would be running faster than the person going 80% the speed of light. To understand this, picture a particle of light bouncing between two mirrors. Lets say that when the particle hits one side and returns to its original position amounts to one second. When you start to move the mirrors, the distance the partical increases because the path of travel is no longer horrizontal but is diagonal thus taking more time to complete one cylce which I defined to be one second. That is why the person moving will seem to be have a slower time than the moving person. So the numbers two_heads_talking used are correct if you are moving with a velocity close to the speed of light. But in the case of my original example, I said they were drifting which implies they were not moving close to the speed of light so the numbers would not be as large as two_heads_talking said.


exactly. i only used the example of the twins as it isn't exactly an easy concept to discuss, let alone explain. so I used an example that was at least somewhere that people could see. Originally I wasnt' going to use any example and leave it with the basic explanation.. but then I thought that the explanation was too basic.. lol..

(at paul) see, my math doesnt' suck at all, you just didn't think in a very large manner..
User avatar
two_heads_talking
 
Posts: 4137
Joined: Thu 04.06.2006 11:03 am
Native language: English

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby goku8851 » Thu 01.11.2007 4:17 pm

two_heads_talking wrote:

exactly. i only used the example of the twins as it isn't exactly an easy concept to discuss, let alone explain. so I used an example that was at least somewhere that people could see. Originally I wasnt' going to use any example and leave it with the basic explanation.. but then I thought that the explanation was too basic.. lol..

(at paul) see, my math doesnt' suck at all, you just didn't think in a very large manner..


(at two_heads_talking)
Perhaps you are the only one here who is capable of being a fellow physicist. Maybe we can become the resident physicist of tjp.
Last edited by goku8851 on Thu 01.11.2007 4:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
There are two great things about politics. One is the money and I forgot the other.
goku8851
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat 01.06.2007 10:50 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby hyperconjugated » Thu 01.11.2007 4:41 pm

goku8851 wrote:Time appears to slow down to the stationary person who is watching the person who is moving(by the way paul, acceleration is not a vector).

Acceleration has both direction and
magnitude,it is a vector quantity. Hence,
an acceleration vector.
Irgendwann fällt jede Mauer
User avatar
hyperconjugated
 
Posts: 636
Joined: Fri 05.06.2005 5:12 pm
Location: Finland
Native language: Finnish

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby goku8851 » Thu 01.11.2007 4:53 pm

I have been shamed by hyperconjugated. I don't know what I was thinking :(
There are two great things about politics. One is the money and I forgot the other.
goku8851
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat 01.06.2007 10:50 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby tanuki » Thu 01.11.2007 5:28 pm

Why should less change happen because one is travelling faster? And why is light speed the magic point where this begins happening? Would it not happen on a smaller scale as well?


Light speed? As I understand it (from some curious and not-thorough-at-all readings of Wikipedia I did some time ago), it takes much less than light speed for a change to exist. The faster something/someone goes, the slower time goes by (from an external point of view), even if at a much smaller scale than light speed.

In fact, going faster than light is thought to be (nearly?) impossible. I think that if you go faster than light, you'll travel to the past or something like that. :D
僕の下手な日本語を直してください。
User avatar
tanuki
 
Posts: 2302
Joined: Sun 09.25.2005 9:00 pm
Location: South America

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby Dehitay » Thu 01.11.2007 5:29 pm

CajunCoder wrote:
Off topic, but I find it interesting that everyone assumes such theories as fact. Time is nothing more than a man-made concept to measure change. Why should less change happen because one is travelling faster? And why is light speed the magic point where this begins happening? Would it not happen on a smaller scale as well?

it's not that less change is happening, it's that less change appears to be happening because of the difference in situations. They're discussing the theory of relativity. However, my mind is almost completely that of an engineer so I can't really appreciate that theory. I love standards. A meter would be a standard measurement. An arm length would be a relative measurement. The latter is useless to me.

Actually back to the post that brought all this up, what were they even doing with their watches and lights? If both watches were synchronized and ran at the same time, the distance between them when they drifted shouldn't be enough to change how they cycle. If they were just clocking how long it takes for them to drift away and back together, the only difference should be from human error.
www.bananamonkeyninja.com
The only webcomic endorsed by Banana Monkey Ninja
User avatar
Dehitay
 
Posts: 1010
Joined: Fri 09.08.2006 8:36 pm
Location: San Antonio, Texas, USA
Native language: English
Gender: Male

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby two_heads_talking » Thu 01.11.2007 6:09 pm

that all depends on how long that tether is.. and how fast they are "drifting" .. you know.. it's all relative.. (oh bad pun)
User avatar
two_heads_talking
 
Posts: 4137
Joined: Thu 04.06.2006 11:03 am
Native language: English

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby guillaumexerces » Thu 01.11.2007 8:41 pm

(@Dehitay)

With reguard to the discontinuity between the time keeping devices (a time keeping device being somthing which detects regular cycles in nature), the difference in time is not due to the imperfections in the devices but in fact the difference in the number of natural cycles the time keeping devices go through. In order to understand why one watch experiences fewer cycles we must relize the subtile fact that one of astronauts must accelerate twords the other in order to meet again. This is assuming the geometry of the universe is not limited(ie. spherical or saddle shaped).

It is theorized that there are at least four demensions mabey up to eleven. We experience 3 spacial dimensions and one time dimension. The rest are said to be extremely small spacial demensions on every point in space (this of course is up for debate amongst many modern physicists and mathamaticians). In order to travel more "rapidly", relitively speaking to a stationary observer, along spacial dimensions, an object must forfit it "motion" along the time dimension. Thus the cycles, the spins and jitters of the very molecules of the watch (and the astronaut attached) slow down so to speak. This property of time and space was realized by experiment in various particle accelerators.

The short life of the muon was lengthened by the pounding an exorbitant amount of energy into the particle. The muon moved faster and jittered less frequently. The same reasoning applies to the astronaut and his rapid acceleration. He experiences less travel in the time dimension.

Particle physics has revealed that as an object approched the speed of light the amount of energy required to accelerate it further increases enormously. This is why it is difficult for large objects, such as people, to accelerate at the speed of light, so far.

The speed of light is seen as a general limit for motion. We have yet to experience somthing travelling faster than light and no matter how much energy we pump into even very small particles they will never actually reach the speed of light, except for the photon of course. So the speed of light is an important landmark in science. Passing it may be impossable or comparable to a phase change, much like water evaporating on a very hot day. Time will tell.
guillaumexerces
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu 01.11.2007 7:27 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby Rounin T » Thu 01.11.2007 10:41 pm

Getting back to the spirit of this thread...

^ ^ may have found the wrong site.
User avatar
Rounin T
 
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu 10.12.2006 5:32 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby zengargoyle » Fri 01.12.2007 1:28 am

zengargoyle reads the thread and does the LOL-ing at the Republican joke... :)
then zengargoyle does the LOL-ing at the amateurish physicists.

when you think that you've found a paradox, that just means that you've forgotten to transform a frame of reference by expressing it in the base unit and keeping your transformations consistent.

the fundamental constant is 'c', the speed of light. the fundamental base unit is distance. time is 'c' over a distance. mass is a distance equal to the event horizon. information is the surface area of an event horizon. gravity is just a flux differential over an enclosed area. and the number of elementary particles in the universe is around 10^80 at most, which means that you're more likely to pick a random particle out of the entire universe than you are to guess my 256 bit encryption key... muahahahah.

the only real paradox lies in temporal causality, but you have to first break out of the light-cone for that, so no real worries there unless you can somehow skip the 'c' limit and go from sub-'c' to super-'c' without crossing the 'c' barrier. but there's no real paradox in General Relativity, beyond GR is currently speculation at best.

the thought that Time is a process of Events is seductive. Tippler's "Omega Point" is predicated on such a belief. should the Universe be closed, and eventually collapse upon itself... then at that time, all that ever was, will once again be. when the Universe is once again the size of an orange... the effects and information and matter and pattern of all that has ever happened will once again be well within light-cone of interaction where events will happen at such a rate that a millisecond will seem like an eternity. Heaven may only come about during the final instant of the collapse when all that ever was and all that ever will be, will all be a flurry of events of such speed that they take an eternity...
User avatar
zengargoyle
 
Posts: 1200
Joined: Sun 05.29.2005 10:16 pm

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby Mike Cash » Fri 01.12.2007 6:39 am

goku8851 wrote:
Rounin (as well as Mike Cash) seem to be well educated in the field of political science but they cannot copmare to my skill physicist. In order for them to prove that they are worthy to be called fellow physicist they must solve this paradox.

Two astronauts, Mike and Rounin, start off next to each other in space. Each has a light and watch attached to their space suites. They each start to drift away from each other but when they meet up with each other they both say that their watch reads slower than the other. Who is right and justify your answer. Here is a hint: it has to do with Einstein’s relativity.

There is an answer to this paradox and I, being a physicist in training, know the answer to this. I will have great respect for anyone who can solve this paradox and will be happy to share the title of physicist.


I make no claim to a knowledge of physics, have no aspirations in that direction, and have made no mention of it. Why do you feel compelled to call me out on this?

And is a "space suite" something like a Mercury capsule with adjoining rooms?
Last edited by Mike Cash on Fri 01.12.2007 6:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Never underestimate my capacity for pettiness.
User avatar
Mike Cash
 
Posts: 2737
Joined: Sun 08.20.2006 3:38 am
Native language: English

RE: Say something about the member above you.

Postby two_heads_talking » Fri 01.12.2007 9:34 am

no the mercury capsule was a no-space suite.. a space suite is something in the Trump Tower..
Last edited by two_heads_talking on Fri 01.12.2007 9:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
two_heads_talking
 
Posts: 4137
Joined: Thu 04.06.2006 11:03 am
Native language: English

PreviousNext

Return to General off topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron