What happens when time slows down at light speed?

  • 52 Replies
  • 11940 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline justin cosseboom

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Hello all im new here but life long chronic contemplater of the nature of things, I have researched a little bit of a lot of things, and reashearched a few things a lot. Enough with the intro, its lovely to be here and to have an opportunitie to connect with other curious beings.

Whats on my mind tonight is time and energy.

Time I see and have come to understand it as a non fundamental tool thats been created to measure events in the unfolding of the universe. I have held feelings for a long time now that it has no place in any part of the fundamental componets that are this, life. An afirmation of this thought came recently while contemplating time travel.  Most poeople will agree while moving at speeds near that of light time passes slower and stops at the speed of light. I do not belive this to be a good way to describe the phenomenon. First I dont think time has any place in this matter. This is what has come to be a better more accurate description for my mind.
What happens is not a slowing of time, but a slowing of the particles and there processes of interaction with other involved particles, so not that 20 years of time did not pass on you while travelling near light speed, you were still gone 20 earth years what you did was move at such a high speed that the normal metamophasis of the particles that we see on earth was slowed or frozen at light speed. You were still gone 20 earth years only for you it seemed perhaps an instant but that state is just a slowed down or frozen state. All particles are "frozen" at light speed or slowed as they near it. I dont see any place for time. Aside from a tool of measure ment. Although you might not have aged physically you may feel like only a moment has passed what is really happening is a slowing of phisical processes due to a relative high speed.  Your still 20 earth years older although for you in a state of suspended or slowed animation it feels like you traveled forward in time. Realisticly you just created circumstances that slowed or froze you in a state due to your speed relative to light. So what do you all think on that one? Still to move at light speed or near it and slow your experience of the unfolding of your own body the feel as if no time has passed is amazing.  I just feel the word time has no place besides as a made up concept that allows us to document the unfolding of things. Times for history, but in a reality thats composed of timeless energy why intergrate it in science?
On to energy.
Its generaly accepted that particles of energy have volume measured by there wave length.  I have been starting to really see this as a slight misunderstanding.  At this point im coming to belive that energy only appears to have volume but in actuality it has no volume. A partical of energy has mass and a wave length but exits In no more than 2 demensions and there for has no actual volume.  Its wavelength may vibrate in 3 or more dimensions of space producing a zero volume particle that can appear to occupie a said volume but in reality the particle is only making itself appear so. This to me is far more likely and makes it much easier to comprehend things like black holes and the first moments of our universe.

Well its late now but im really interested if these ideas cary any potential in reality. So every one please share your thoughts and knowledge.  I do apologize for my lay man ish way of expressing things but I try to break all things down in the simplest way possible.  I feel the true nature of things is a most simple foundation so simple we cant see it even if its truth has always been right under our nose. The details however are infinite and beautiful but only intricate expressions of a most simple set of blocks.


I used to think the universe was full of paradoxes but now all I see are things that appear to contradict each other but these false paradoxes disolve with better understanding. The universe has no contradictions but is full of things that appear to contradict at a glance.
« Last Edit: 27/01/2014 09:21:53 by chris »

*

Offline justin cosseboom

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #1 on: 08/02/2014 07:52:04 »
Any one? I dont need a definitive answer, just a yes its in the realm of possiblities or no. Please any input is appreciated.


Thanks

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #2 on: 08/02/2014 12:50:49 »
What happens when time slows down at light speed?
It doesn't. Neither at light speed nor at others speeds.

*

Offline justin cosseboom

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #3 on: 08/02/2014 20:23:10 »
What happens when time slows down at light speed?
It doesn't. Neither at light speed nor at others speeds.
Exactly my thoughts.  Why do so called documentaries (natgeo discovery etc.) Insist on describing real phenomenon as something that is in fact science fiction. Misleading thousands perhaps millions of viewers who now belive time trave is a real thing. The truth I find is far more spectacular than any science fiction fantasy world. Ha things that boggle my mind!



*

Offline justin cosseboom

  • First timers
  • *
  • 4
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #4 on: 08/02/2014 20:37:28 »
Im most curious to hear thoughts as regaurds to my question about particle volume as measured by there wave length. That concept makes even less sense than time travel. 1 and or 2 dimensional particles of energy vibrating in multi demensional space giving the illusion of volume but not actually haveing any makes perfect senses to me and makes things like  black holes and the big bang completely understandable. The concept of energy possessing actual volume seems to straight forwardly contradict these aspects of the universe.

Please anyone you thoughts are appreciated!

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12339
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #5 on: 10/02/2014 03:17:03 »
The problem with any idea of light 'slowing down' is that a time dilation is observer dependent. It's dependent of your speed (and mass) relative what you measure. So three observers, having different mass and speeds relative each other, will define a far away rocket as having 'three different' time dilations, depending on observer. Your local clock doesn't lie though, it never does.

What it means is that if you want the rockets particles to 'slow down', then they have to slow down three different ways, 'simultaneously', or four if I include the rockets 'own local wrist watch'. You and me both though, agree on that 'time' exist, and as I read you, locally of a same measure relative oneself.
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #6 on: 10/02/2014 08:43:19 »
What happens when time slows down at light speed?
It doesn't. Neither at light speed nor at others speeds.
Exactly my thoughts.  Why do so called documentaries (natgeo discovery etc.) Insist on describing real phenomenon as something that is in fact science fiction. Misleading thousands perhaps millions of viewers who now belive time trave is a real thing. The truth I find is far more spectacular than any science fiction fantasy world. Ha things that boggle my mind!
Documentaries usually tend to show things in a spectacular, fascinating way and to oversimplify, to entertain people better...

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #7 on: 10/02/2014 15:54:30 »
What happens when time slows down at light speed?
It doesn't. Neither at light speed nor at others speeds.
Exactly my thoughts.  Why do so called documentaries (natgeo discovery etc.) Insist on describing real phenomenon as something that is in fact science fiction. Misleading thousands perhaps millions of viewers who now belive time trave is a real thing. The truth I find is far more spectacular than any science fiction fantasy world. Ha things that boggle my mind!
Documentaries usually tend to show things in a spectacular, fascinating way and to oversimplify, to entertain people better...

I agree with you, Lightarrow, but I think the OP may be misinterpreting what relativity does say about time.  It says that an observer at rest with respect to some process will always observe the same physics as any other observer at rest.  An observer moving with respect to some process will see that process occurring slower than if they were at rest WRT that process, whether that is a clock tick or the decay of a muon.  In other words, moving clocks run slow.  So while it is fair to say that time slows down for moving observers with respect to stationary observers, the italicized words are extremely important.  You can't make a blanket statement, as stated in the original post, that "time slows down [near] light speed," since it's only in comparison of clocks moving with respect to each other that time dilation appears.

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #8 on: 10/02/2014 22:36:18 »
I agree with you, Lightarrow, but I think the OP may be misinterpreting what relativity does say about time.  It says that an observer at rest with respect to some process will always observe the same physics as any other observer at rest.  An observer moving with respect to some process will see that process occurring slower than if they were at rest WRT that process, whether that is a clock tick or the decay of a muon.  In other words, moving clocks run slow.  So while it is fair to say that time slows down for moving observers with respect to stationary observers, the italicized words are extremely important.  You can't make a blanket statement, as stated in the original post, that "time slows down [near] light speed," since it's only in comparison of clocks moving with respect to each other that time dilation appears.
Certainly. Furthermore, it should be also specified that those running clocks runs slower with respect *those clocks near it, in the frame of reference of the stationary observer* and not with respect a fixed observer in an arbitrary point of its frame, because this has no physical meaning. Unless the two clocks one day meet again, so that they can be compared.
There are a lot of things which should be precised, it's meaningless to make, as you said, "blank statements".

--
lightarrow

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1449
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #9 on: 11/02/2014 12:01:47 »
... it should be also specified that those running clocks runs slower with respect *those clocks near it, in the frame of reference of the stationary observer* and not with respect a fixed observer in an arbitrary point of its frame, because this has no physical meaning.
I don't quite follow what you mean here; with respect to the parts I've bolded:

a. I wasn't aware that it varied with distance  - how near do the clocks have to be for the moving clocks to run slow relative to the stationary observer's clock ?

b. What is the 'fixed observer' fixed relative to, and which frame is 'its' frame?

I also don't really see what it is that 'has no physical meaning'... 
« Last Edit: 11/02/2014 12:05:49 by dlorde »

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #10 on: 12/02/2014 13:04:38 »
... it should be also specified that those running clocks runs slower with respect *those clocks near it, in the frame of reference of the stationary observer* and not with respect a fixed observer in an arbitrary point of its frame, because this has no physical meaning.
I don't quite follow what you mean here; with respect to the parts I've bolded:
a. I wasn't aware that it varied with distance  - how near do the clocks have to be for the moving clocks to run slow relative to the stationary observer's clock ?
No, with "near" I mean that you have to compare two close physical clocks, one inside a starship which passes by a platform, the other on the platform; you have to compare the starship clock with the one in the platform whis is close to it, not to "any" clock of the platform ("the platform" here plays the role of "the other frame of reference").
Quote
b. What is the 'fixed observer' fixed relative to, and which frame is 'its' frame?
I also don't really see what it is that 'has no physical meaning'... 
With he term "Fixed observer" I intended, for example, the twin which stays on Earth while the other travels in a starship and is far away. Sorry for the poor language.
What has no physical meaning is to say: "here on Earth my clock signs 12:00:00, there, inside the far away starship the clock now signs...".
You can only compare two close clocks (because in this way you can refer both to the same "event": the physical "meeting" of the two clocks). To do this you need two frame of reference, ***for example*** two platforms, one stationary with respect to Earth, the other with the starship. If you don't have those physical platforms, you have to make computations *as if you had* and imagine clocks all along the starship trajectory, one row of clocks stationary with respect to Earth, the other stationary with respect to starship, every clock of a frame syncronized (for example) with Einstein rule.
Other ways of comparing times between the two frames have no physical meaning (and generate tons of paradoxes, tons of questions by laymen, tons of ... crackpots about relativity).

--
lightarrow
« Last Edit: 12/02/2014 13:14:07 by lightarrow »

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1449
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #11 on: 12/02/2014 17:19:23 »
You can only compare two close clocks (because in this way you can refer both to the same "event": the physical "meeting" of the two clocks). To do this you need two frame of reference, ***for example*** two platforms, one stationary with respect to Earth, the other with the starship. If you don't have those physical platforms, you have to make computations *as if you had* and imagine clocks all along the starship trajectory, one row of clocks stationary with respect to Earth, the other stationary with respect to starship, every clock of a frame syncronized (for example) with Einstein rule.
Other ways of comparing times between the two frames have no physical meaning (and generate tons of paradoxes, tons of questions by laymen, tons of ... crackpots about relativity).
OK, I see what you mean; thanks for the explanation.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #12 on: 16/02/2014 00:51:10 »
The problem with any idea of light 'slowing down' is that a time dilation is observer dependent. It's dependent of your speed (and mass) relative what you measure. So three observers, having different mass and speeds relative each other, will define a far away rocket as having 'three different' time dilations, depending on observer. Your local clock doesn't lie though, it never does.

What it means is that if you want the rockets particles to 'slow down', then they have to slow down three different ways, 'simultaneously', or four if I include the rockets 'own local wrist watch'. You and me both though, agree on that 'time' exist, and as I read you, locally of a same measure relative oneself.

The particles don't have to slow down in different ways everyone is slowing at different rates to each other in a relativistic relationship and it all balances out. It's just there is no universal frame of reference to oversee all the relative time dilation. Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline ScientificSorcerer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 367
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #13 on: 16/02/2014 06:29:56 »
random spam post! you have just been spammed

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #14 on: 16/02/2014 17:25:09 »
Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
I have understood nothing of this passage. Can you please make a specific example?

*

Offline flr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 302
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #15 on: 16/02/2014 22:17:39 »
Your local clock doesn't lie though, it never does.
What if the locality is not absolute? http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.0931

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #16 on: 23/02/2014 00:02:32 »
Great Post Justin.
                              According to relativity time would slow down with speed. If a photon is traveling at the speed of light relative to its local reference frame then it is frozen in time according to relativity [ reference frames are now defined by gravitational space geometry but the phrase was first introduced by Galileo when he noticed that an observer inside a wooden framed cabin on a ship could not determine if he was moving or not].  It makes no difference how that speed compares to a separate outside reference frame.  If someone was traveling at near the speed of light relative to and within our frame everything within their vehicle would seem to be unchanged but the interactions viewed through the port hole would appear to be accelerated.
      Special relativity was built on the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and Ponecare's "The Postulate of Relativity".  The only original contribution in SR is the move away from a preferred reference frame and the related requirement that changes in fourth dimension co-ordinates represent an change in time.  The predictions for any experiment or observation are presumed to be the same for LET and SR [ this may change shortly ].  T
      I think that your comments are correct.  There are many physicist that feel that time is more an illusion of human perception. For example the Russian Physicist L. Boldyreva and N. Sotina have published a book titled "A Theory of Light without Special Relativity".  One of the few experts on relativity told me at a conference that the more you understand relativity the more troubling questions you will have.
      Special Relativity is a lot like the fable of the Emperor's Clothes in which the fabric could only be seen by those with intelligence.  It took an unpretentious child to point out to the Emperor that he was naked. Like wise those who question relativity are often accused of not understanding it by those who actually do not.
       In keeping with this thought I am going to post a link in the new theories section to a you tube video in which a three year old challenges Einstein.  I think you will like it a lot.     

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #17 on: 23/02/2014 00:26:35 »
Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
I have understood nothing of this passage. Can you please make a specific example?

If two frames are running parallel to each other at the same velocity they are equivalent. Any difference in vector direction makes them un-equivalent and therefore they run at different speeds however minute the difference.
« Last Edit: 23/02/2014 00:31:05 by jeffreyH »
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #18 on: 23/02/2014 01:13:30 »
Great Post Justin.
                              According to relativity time would slow down with speed. If a photon is traveling at the speed of light relative to its local reference frame then it is frozen in time according to relativity [ reference frames are now defined by gravitational space geometry but the phrase was first introduced by Galileo when he noticed that an observer inside a wooden framed cabin on a ship could not determine if he was moving or not].  It makes no difference how that speed compares to a separate outside reference frame.  If someone was traveling at near the speed of light relative to and within our frame everything within their vehicle would seem to be unchanged but the interactions viewed through the port hole would appear to be accelerated.
      Special relativity was built on the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction and Ponecare's "The Postulate of Relativity".  The only original contribution in SR is the move away from a preferred reference frame and the related requirement that changes in fourth dimension co-ordinates represent an change in time.  The predictions for any experiment or observation are presumed to be the same for LET and SR [ this may change shortly ].  T
      I think that your comments are correct.  There are many physicist that feel that time is more an illusion of human perception. For example the Russian Physicist L. Boldyreva and N. Sotina have published a book titled "A Theory of Light without Special Relativity".  One of the few experts on relativity told me at a conference that the more you understand relativity the more troubling questions you will have.
      Special Relativity is a lot like the fable of the Emperor's Clothes in which the fabric could only be seen by those with intelligence.  It took an unpretentious child to point out to the Emperor that he was naked. Like wise those who question relativity are often accused of not understanding it by those who actually do not.
       In keeping with this thought I am going to post a link in the new theories section to a you tube video in which a three year old challenges Einstein.  I think you will like it a lot.   

Well the braided preon theory and contraction/expansion are just another way of describing relativity. What I hadn't come across before was LET

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

I have gone back over the history between 1800s - 1930s and tried to retraced the steps that led to relativity and the standard model. This I missed so I am going to take a look into it. The video was a bit of a let down BTW.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #19 on: 23/02/2014 20:13:29 »
What I find strange is that people are so quick to write off LET when it fits so well with what we see (http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Conspiracy.html). The distortions introduced by Einstein manage to provide a potential account for gravity by turning it into a non-force, but what if it's a real force like all the others and the distortions required to pretend that it isn't a force are nothing more than a misleading mathematical trick?

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #20 on: 23/02/2014 23:34:10 »
What I find strange is that people are so quick to write off LET when it fits so well with what we see (http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Conspiracy.html). The distortions introduced by Einstein manage to provide a potential account for gravity by turning it into a non-force, but what if it's a real force like all the others and the distortions required to pretend that it isn't a force are nothing more than a misleading mathematical trick?

That thought also crossed my mind.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #21 on: 24/02/2014 14:40:59 »
Here are some additional thoughts.
                                                    The Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment only agrees with relativity if the reference frame is rotating with the earth.  The Hafele-Keating experiment only works with relativity if the reference frame is not rotating with the Earth. Also, the comparison between differently oriented rectangular courses in the Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment makes it possible to calculate the rotational speed of the earth relative to the speed of light.

       There has been a wealth of experiments and observations showing that neutrinos travel at the speed of light and that they can change flavor while moving at that speed.  If they where frozen in time they could not undergo the change.

Justin; as for your second question about volume, one of the most important principles of string theory is that string propagation is restricted to a reduction to minimal space and time.  There are a lot of complicated formulas for calculating this involving multiple dimensions.

    In quantum theory, in contrast to what is assumed by most engineers and technicians, the wave functions are not representing real waves. Instead they are an abstract mathematical tool for calculating probable outcomes.  A quantum theorist would not say that a photon travels at the speed of light, but that the time distance intervals for the probability field are progressing at the speed of light.  The actualization of the photon or electron involved in an interaction only represents a restriction to one set of probable values which then represents a new more restricted probability field.  I am not sure, but volume may not be one of these values.

    Someone working with relativity would want to define the photon or electron with four dimensional co-ordinates.     
       
     All of these theories probably have some partial truths and some partial misconceptions.  Just about every one has ideas on how to unite these theories, including myself, but for now those mussings belong in new theories.

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #22 on: 24/02/2014 18:53:47 »
Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
I have understood nothing of this passage. Can you please make a specific example?
If two frames are running parallel to each other at the same velocity
"velocity" measured in which frame?
Quote
they are equivalent. Any difference in vector direction makes them un-equivalent and therefore they run at different speeds however minute the difference.
What does "they run at different speeds" means? Are you referring to time rhythm or something of this kind? Or?

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #23 on: 24/02/2014 18:58:56 »
What I find strange is that people are so quick to write off LET when it fits so well with what we see (http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Conspiracy.html). The distortions introduced by Einstein manage to provide a potential account for gravity by turning it into a non-force, but what if it's a real force like all the others and the distortions required to pretend that it isn't a force are nothing more than a misleading mathematical trick?
In the page you have linked there is a missing column: "Supports General Relativity".

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #24 on: 24/02/2014 19:26:31 »
What I find strange is that people are so quick to write off LET when it fits so well with what we see (http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Conspiracy.html). The distortions introduced by Einstein manage to provide a potential account for gravity by turning it into a non-force, but what if it's a real force like all the others and the distortions required to pretend that it isn't a force are nothing more than a misleading mathematical trick?
In the page you have linked there is a missing column: "Supports General Relativity".

That's the first column - just a different label on it.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #25 on: 24/02/2014 19:32:39 »
       There has been a wealth of experiments and observations showing that neutrinos travel at the speed of light and that they can change flavor while moving at that speed.  If they where frozen in time they could not undergo the change.

The contortions introduced by SR/GR reduce the distance to zero for any trip made by anything that travels at the speed of light, so that leaves no room for neutrinos to change flavour at regular intervals along the way. Of course, give a neutrino the tiniest bit of mass and the problem may go away for both theories because it presumably won't quite be travelling at the speed of light.
« Last Edit: 24/02/2014 19:34:10 by David Cooper »

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #26 on: 25/02/2014 18:56:39 »
Out of interest, if neutrinos really do travel at the speed of light, how far do they normally travel through our frame of reference before changing flavour, and could this be used to pin down a preferred frame?

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #27 on: 25/02/2014 20:28:55 »
Out of interest, if neutrinos really do travel at the speed of light, how far do they normally travel through our frame of reference before changing flavour, and could this be used to pin down a preferred frame?

Surely they would be affected by gravity as light is. Are you thinking of the distance between 2 consecutive changes?
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #28 on: 25/02/2014 20:35:17 »
Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
I have understood nothing of this passage. Can you please make a specific example?

To lightarraow: All with respect to relative time dilation.

If two frames are running parallel to each other at the same velocity
"velocity" measured in which frame?
Quote

To lightarrow If the vector direction and velocity of two frames are the same they can be considered equivalent. They will be separated by distance n but be parallel to each other.

they are equivalent. Any difference in vector direction makes them un-equivalent and therefore they run at different speeds however minute the difference.
What does "they run at different speeds" means? Are you referring to time rhythm or something of this kind? Or?

Time dilation.
« Last Edit: 25/02/2014 20:37:02 by jeffreyH »
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #29 on: 26/02/2014 02:02:24 »
Good to see some interest:
                                               The first neutrinos and the first photons from event sources billions of light years away reach detectors on earth simultaneously.

Neutrinos traveling from an earth bound source to an earth bound detector ( within the same reference frame ) arrive simultaneously with gamma rays, but more importantly the distance or time required for a change in neutrino type is short. 

I had mentioned in a post some time ago the possibility that the reason for the apparent contradictions could be our limited ability to determine minute differences in speed and minute mass.  I am currently leaning towards neutrinos as having mass and traveling at the speed of light.  There is a possibility that the parameters defining the differences between mass and energy are much more muddled than we currently believe.

When I heard the same sentiment from someone working in this field I asked them what this would mean for relativity.  They replied that they were not interested in theory, only measurements.  Perhaps we do need more data.

*

Offline lightarrow

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4586
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #30 on: 26/02/2014 11:53:59 »
Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount. This amount could be 1 nanosecond or 8 years slower or faster.
I have understood nothing of this passage. Can you please make a specific example?

To lightarraow: All with respect to relative time dilation.

If two frames are running parallel to each other at the same velocity
"velocity" measured in which frame?
Quote

To lightarrow If the vector direction and velocity of two frames are the same they can be considered equivalent. They will be separated by distance n but be parallel to each other.

they are equivalent. Any difference in vector direction makes them un-equivalent and therefore they run at different speeds however minute the difference.
What does "they run at different speeds" means? Are you referring to time rhythm or something of this kind? Or?

Time dilation.
Ok. Then your statement:
<<Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount.>>
has no meaning.

--
lightarrow

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #31 on: 26/02/2014 14:36:09 »
<<Any particular frame in the entire universe is running at a different speed to everything else that has a frame not equivalent with it's own by a particular amount.>>
has no meaning.

--
lightarrow

It could have been worded better.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline David Cooper

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1505
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #32 on: 26/02/2014 18:47:27 »
Out of interest, if neutrinos really do travel at the speed of light, how far do they normally travel through our frame of reference before changing flavour, and could this be used to pin down a preferred frame?

Surely they would be affected by gravity as light is. Are you thinking of the distance between 2 consecutive changes?

If there is a distance they have to travel before they change form, that distance will be either be measured as different for different frames (with one frame maximising them) or else the distance will vary depending on the rest frame of the source of the neutrinos. The latter would need to be the case if there is no preferred frame.

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #33 on: 07/03/2014 01:20:29 »
Justin:
           Your comment that time stops at the speed of light according to relativity is correct despite some of the comments such as you can't make such blanket statements.  Einstein made them.

All of the discussion about different frames of reference are irrelevant as your example can take place completely within one reference frame.

The speed of light is universal and the same in all reference frames.  For this reason it is often called the universal yard stick.

This was already known when Einstein was developing his theories.  He needed a way to account for this in his concept for doing away with preferred reference frames.  He accomplished this by having time intervals contract with velocity the same as other dimensions;  making the time dimension's value zero in any reference frame at the speed of light.

Some of the questions I raised can also be dealt with within a single reference frame.  Neutrino speed and osculation can be measured on earth.

The Michelson-Gale-Pearson experiment was a variation of the Sagnac experiment in which the earth itself was the turntable.  Even though the light paths were traveling against and with the earth's rotation over different portions of the distance they returned simultaneously.  The speed of light had adjusted relative to the rotating reference frame of the rotating gravitational field or earth mass.

By the way, Einstein incorrectly predicted the results in both the Sagnac and MGP experiments.  He was later saved by Minkowski who re-interpreted the experiment.  Einstein was often said to be the worst interpreter of his own theory [ Herman Minkowski was responsible for most of the math in Einstein's GR and SR ].

In the Hafele-Keating experiment atomic clocks are flown in opposite east and west directions at the same speed relative to the earth.  Einstein correctly predicted that the east atomic clock would have been slower.
Supposedly this was because the east clock was moving faster having had the motion of the earth added to it.
For the earth's speed to be added and subtracted then the reference frame could not be rotating with the earth.   

One experiment is a SR experiment and the other is a GR experiment but it seems to me that the reference frame should still be the same in both experiments.

I agree with Justin that time is not a factor.  I think that what could be called the time vector remains the same ( at least within the shock wave of the Big Bang ) and that everything else adjust to maintain their defining parameters relative to the gravitational filed and other  background ambients ( as per the video I mentioned earlier in this thread ).

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #34 on: 07/03/2014 01:46:15 »
Justin:
           Your comment that time stops at the speed of light according to relativity is correct despite some of the comments such as you can't make such blanket statements.  Einstein made them.

Since we're a science forum and simply stating your opinion doesn't make it true, here's some arguments that show you cannot, indeed, move at light speed and asking about "If I'm moving at light speed, what do I see?" are unanswerable:
 http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/headlights.html

(Or indeed refer to any any textbook covering the postulates of special relativity, since the postulates implicitly preclude dealing with light-speed reference frames).

Since you disagree with these sources, could you provide counter-references of your own, Sciconoclast?

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #35 on: 07/03/2014 02:22:49 »
Justin:
           Your comment that time stops at the speed of light according to relativity is correct despite some of the comments such as you can't make such blanket statements.  Einstein made them.

Since we're a science forum and simply stating your opinion doesn't make it true, here's some arguments that show you cannot, indeed, move at light speed and asking about "If I'm moving at light speed, what do I see?" are unanswerable:
 http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/headlights.html

(Or indeed refer to any any textbook covering the postulates of special relativity, since the postulates implicitly preclude dealing with light-speed reference frames).

Since you disagree with these sources, could you provide counter-references of your own, Sciconoclast?

This is always a very difficult subject to debate. Although light has a wavelength and can be shifted it preserves its information content over vast distances. Otherwise it could not be used to determine the composition of stars, planets etc. So while one aspect of light, the wavelength, is a variable the informational content is fixed until observed, absorbed or reflected. With reflection the informational content is necessarily changed due to the change in the composition of the light. This fixation of information content could be argued to be via time dilation but that could never be proven anyway.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #36 on: 07/03/2014 15:21:27 »
Justin:
           Your comment that time stops at the speed of light according to relativity is correct despite some of the comments such as you can't make such blanket statements.  Einstein made them.

Since we're a science forum and simply stating your opinion doesn't make it true, here's some arguments that show you cannot, indeed, move at light speed and asking about "If I'm moving at light speed, what do I see?" are unanswerable:
 http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/headlights.html

(Or indeed refer to any any textbook covering the postulates of special relativity, since the postulates implicitly preclude dealing with light-speed reference frames).

Since you disagree with these sources, could you provide counter-references of your own, Sciconoclast?

This is always a very difficult subject to debate. Although light has a wavelength and can be shifted it preserves its information content over vast distances. Otherwise it could not be used to determine the composition of stars, planets etc. So while one aspect of light, the wavelength, is a variable the informational content is fixed until observed, absorbed or reflected. With reflection the informational content is necessarily changed due to the change in the composition of the light. This fixation of information content could be argued to be via time dilation but that could never be proven anyway.

It's not really a hard topic to debate at all if you're precise about things.  The problem is that we're arguing on the internet, rather than debating based on science, so posters can say what they "feel" is correct based on a misunderstanding of what relativity says rather than drilling down precisely into details.  When I first learned relativity, I had the same misunderstandings, so I can't fault anyone for it.

The hard fact is that we cannot define a reference frame in special relativity that is traveling at light speed.  So describing what a photon "experiences" as we would do for an observer with mass is meaningless.  We simply don't have a theory or model that covers it. 

What we can say, as you point out, is that photons appear to not decay as massive particles would, so in a sense they don't change their structure over time as other particles with mass do.  Furthermore, particles like neutrinos can change their flavor, but would not be able to do so if they had no mass.  So in that sense, masslessness is tied to static behavior of the particles.  But in a very obvious way, photons aren't static--they are created and destroyed. 

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #37 on: 08/03/2014 01:24:09 »
JP; we may be miss-reading each others comments.

I assumed that when Justin stated, "while moving at speeds near that of light time passes slower" he was including the possibility of a physical observer; but, when he stated, "and stops at the speed of light" he was only referring to energy that is capable of the speed of light.  When I stated that he was correct that time stops at the speed of light I was not implying that a physical observer could experience that.

There is nothing in your reference to disagree with that.  I have never met a physicist  who did not know that according to relativity time changes for an observer as velocity changes, that the speed of light is universal, that time is frozen at the speed of light, and that matter cannot reach the speed of light [ usually this is stated as matter having to obtain infinite mass - I think your reference stating that infinite accelerating energy is required is basically saying the same thing ]. 

As for time being frozen at the speed of light here is a quote from Brian Green in Special Relativity in a Nut Shell. "Because motion through both time and space must always add up to the speed of light, when an object (such as a photon) moves through space at light speed, Einstein reasoned, there's no room for motion and time, consequently, stops."          www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/special-relativity-nutshell.html


*

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3366
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #38 on: 08/03/2014 03:22:56 »
I'm not misreading you, Sciconoclast.  Science can only talk about what we, as massive observers, can access via experiments.  Saying that time is frozen at the speed of light is ambiguous at best and probably meaningless.  Because we, nor any observer, nor our experimental apparati can take measurements from the point of view of a photon (or other light-speed entity), we can't measure time (or distance) from its point of view.  We can talk about how we as massive observers experience photons and say some thing about photons from that perspective.

If we do make the mistake of thinking that time stops for a photon at light speed as we'd assume by naively applying the equations of special relativity, we end up with a paradox--we as massive observers DO see photons changed.  They can be emitted and absorbed, for example.  But if photons experience no time, how can they ever be emitted and absorbed? 

What Brian Greene seems to be doing in that post is to define clock measurements in terms of a particle's world line.  Unfortunately, in dumbing the science down for a lay article, he's made it somewhat misleading (a problem with a great deal of pop-sci work).  The fact is that however we want to define "time" for photons or other massless particles, it is not the same thing as time experienced by massive particles.  We have to pick a definition precisely and tell others what we mean by that definition. 

Again, as I said in my first post, blanket statements like "photons experience no time" are misleading and fairly meaningless (until we define what we mean by time).

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #39 on: 08/03/2014 10:33:13 »
I'm not misreading you, Sciconoclast.  Science can only talk about what we, as massive observers, can access via experiments.  Saying that time is frozen at the speed of light is ambiguous at best and probably meaningless.  Because we, nor any observer, nor our experimental apparati can take measurements from the point of view of a photon (or other light-speed entity), we can't measure time (or distance) from its point of view.  We can talk about how we as massive observers experience photons and say some thing about photons from that perspective.

If we do make the mistake of thinking that time stops for a photon at light speed as we'd assume by naively applying the equations of special relativity, we end up with a paradox--we as massive observers DO see photons changed.  They can be emitted and absorbed, for example.  But if photons experience no time, how can they ever be emitted and absorbed? 

What Brian Greene seems to be doing in that post is to define clock measurements in terms of a particle's world line.  Unfortunately, in dumbing the science down for a lay article, he's made it somewhat misleading (a problem with a great deal of pop-sci work).  The fact is that however we want to define "time" for photons or other massless particles, it is not the same thing as time experienced by massive particles.  We have to pick a definition precisely and tell others what we mean by that definition. 

Again, as I said in my first post, blanket statements like "photons experience no time" are misleading and fairly meaningless (until we define what we mean by time).

It can be said that the spectrum of light remains unchanged barring any interactions. Time is a problematic concept to apply generally but it is all we have for purposes of measurement.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12339
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #40 on: 08/03/2014 12:44:23 »
Sorry but "What happens when time slows down at light speed?" is wrong. Time stops for noone. It's observer dependencies, I thought I had made that one clear by the example of three observers at different speed, each one defining different time dilations for the others, noone agreeing with another's local measurements? What is unclear with that example? That time dilations is measurable as in a twin experiment, is a result of 'c', locally giving you a same answer (equilibrium) in each uniformly moving frame of reference, no matter your speed or mass.

As for massless 'photons' they have a speed that is a limit. If a neutrino has a ever so slight rest mass it can't be 'moving' at 'c'. If it could Einstein would be wrong.

Time does not slow down locally.
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1449
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #41 on: 08/03/2014 14:16:00 »
It can be said that the spectrum of light remains unchanged barring any interactions.
A spectrum is the range of frequencies of many photons; it isn't relevant to a discussion of individual photons and how they may or may not experience time.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #42 on: 08/03/2014 15:36:45 »
It can be said that the spectrum of light remains unchanged barring any interactions.
A spectrum is the range of frequencies of many photons; it isn't relevant to a discussion of individual photons and how they may or may not experience time.

All the photons making up the spectrum remain unchanged. Sorry for not being specific enough. I thought that was a given.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1449
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #43 on: 08/03/2014 17:03:21 »
All the photons making up the spectrum remain unchanged. Sorry for not being specific enough. I thought that was a given.
OK - I see what you mean - but why would any photon change without an interaction, and don't photon interactions involve absorption and re-emission (i.e. a 'new' photon emerges) ? I'm struggling to see what your point is - I'm not well up on this stuff...

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #44 on: 08/03/2014 23:39:27 »
All the photons making up the spectrum remain unchanged. Sorry for not being specific enough. I thought that was a given.
OK - I see what you mean - but why would any photon change without an interaction, and don't photon interactions involve absorption and re-emission (i.e. a 'new' photon emerges) ? I'm struggling to see what your point is - I'm not well up on this stuff...

They remain unchanged when they don't interact, when they leave a distant star and reach a telescope they have avoided collisions all the way along their path.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1449
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #45 on: 09/03/2014 00:08:31 »
They remain unchanged when they don't interact, when they leave a distant star and reach a telescope they have avoided collisions all the way along their path.
That was my point; I wondered why it was necessary to say that...

I don't suppose it matters.

« Last Edit: 09/03/2014 00:10:42 by dlorde »

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #46 on: 09/03/2014 01:44:22 »
JP; you have not yet provided a reference stating that time does not stop at the speed of light.  It only provided an explanation for why things with mass cannot achieve the speed of light and a biographers note on Einsteins musings from before he came to relativity.

Technically, a better wording would be that the value for light in the fourth dimension is always zero.

As for the reference I gave as being simplified, I looked especially for a simple explanation.  Based on the e-mail that you sent me some time ago, as to why this was not a good forum to introduce my recent experiments, I thought that this is the kind of reference that you wanted. It was easy to understand and in agreement with the more complicated mathematical explanations that I have seen.
 
"Every thing should be as simple as possible, but not simpler", Albert Einstein.
"If you can't explain your theory so that a bar tender can understand it, then it is probably wrong", I think this was by Maxwell but it may have been one of the others.

It may be that the emission absorption contradiction that you mentioned may be because we have dumbed down and are talking about particles and photons and speed.  This may help: "Sense  the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion", Albert Einstein, Metaphysics of Relativity, 1950.

What Einstein actually proposed is not in question whether or not he was completely correct is.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #47 on: 09/03/2014 11:44:27 »
JP; you have not yet provided a reference stating that time does not stop at the speed of light.  It only provided an explanation for why things with mass cannot achieve the speed of light and a biographers note on Einsteins musings from before he came to relativity.

Technically, a better wording would be that the value for light in the fourth dimension is always zero.

As for the reference I gave as being simplified, I looked especially for a simple explanation.  Based on the e-mail that you sent me some time ago, as to why this was not a good forum to introduce my recent experiments, I thought that this is the kind of reference that you wanted. It was easy to understand and in agreement with the more complicated mathematical explanations that I have seen.
 
"Every thing should be as simple as possible, but not simpler", Albert Einstein.
"If you can't explain your theory so that a bar tender can understand it, then it is probably wrong", I think this was by Maxwell but it may have been one of the others.

It may be that the emission absorption contradiction that you mentioned may be because we have dumbed down and are talking about particles and photons and speed.  This may help: "Sense  the theory of general relativity implies the representation of physical reality by a continuous field, the concept of particles or material points cannot play a fundamental part, nor can the concept of motion", Albert Einstein, Metaphysics of Relativity, 1950.

What Einstein actually proposed is not in question whether or not he was completely correct is.

Can you elucidate the emission absorption contradiction as if explaining it to a bar tender? I would like to know more.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline sciconoclast

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 149
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #48 on: 09/03/2014 12:48:26 »
Einstein and Bohr only agreed on a few things.  One of them was that reality is only mathematical probability fields that governed where and when things actualize.  The probability for a photon's incorporation into an electron or its existence outside of it are already present in the quantum field and occur when the probability is greatest. I am not the best person to explain this because I am not a true believer.

"The field thus becomes an irreducible element of physical description.....The particle can only appear as a limited region of space in which the field strength or the density are particularly high." Albert Einstein.

"Einsteins Relativity is a Theory of posteriori Effects not a priori causes..." from Geoff Hasehurst on Time and Reality.

I am also troubled by suggestion that we as massive observers cannot contemplate things from the viewpoint at the speed of light.   The reference sight that JP listed reveals that Einstein was attempting this at a very early age.  This of course continued throughout his life.  The most famous of these mind experiments was when he was on a bus traveling away from a clock on a building and how the information from the clock would be frozen if the bus was traveling at the speed of light.  It is not famous because it is a good representation of relativity but because it led him to relativity.

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." Albert Einstein.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge". Albert Einstein

*

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1296
    • View Profile
Re: What happens when time slows down at light speed?
« Reply #49 on: 09/03/2014 14:22:24 »


"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination." Albert Einstein.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge". Albert Einstein
Excellent quote my friend! It might be good for our cookie cutter scientists of today to start using a little of this vanishing quality!
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."