Now on ScienceBlogs: Surveying the "integrative medicine" landscape (2012 edition)

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Built on Facts

An exploration of physics and the quest to understand our world.

Profile

profile.jpg Matt Springer is a graduate student of physics at Texas A&M university. He is also an occasional writer and tinkerer, and he is probably too curious for his own good.

Search

Twitter

Yes, I've joined the horde. @BuiltOnFacts. Follow if you'd like!

Donate

Help Matt not starve! Use this link to amazon.com when you order from Amazon, and a fraction of the purchase price will be sent to me at zero cost to you. Much obliged, and thanks for your patronage.


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Physics/Math Blogs

My Other-Than-Physics Reading (variable, very incomplete)

« Football and Error | Main | Hunting and Animal Size »

Reader Mail - Rockets and Relativity

Posted on: January 7, 2009 10:00 AM, by Matt Springer

Reader Scott writes in with a good question that I've heard posed by several people in various places, because it really goes to the core of the counterintuitive nature of relativity.

Okay, let's assume I'm in a spacecraft moving at a speed of c-1 m/s. That's one m/s less than the speed of light. Would I be able to move from the back of the ship to the front at 1 m/s? Would I even be able to survive at that speed?

Here's my reply, extended a bit to include the relevant equations and go into a little more detail. The derivations will all wait until later:

Yes indeed. The question at issue is your speed with respect to a particular reference frame. Let's pretend that you're on an airplane flying at 500 mph with respect to the ground. There's nothing stopping you from walking forward at 1 mph with respect to the plane. And that also happens to mean that you're walking at 501 mph with respect to an observer on the ground. Assuming the plane ride is nice and smooth and the windows are closed, you wouldn't even be able to tell the difference between that and walking in a plane parked on the runway. This is fundamental in modern physics: there's no preferred inertial reference frame, the laws of physics work the same way in all of them.

An inevitable consequence of this are the relativistic effects of time dilation and length contraction. This implies that in fact velocities don't add in such a simple way. So when you walk at 1 m/s in a ship going 299999999 m/s with respect to the ground (pretending the speed of light is exactly 300000000 m/s for simplicity), you appear to yourself to be walking at 1 m/s inside the ship, just as in any other case. The guy on the ground will (crunching some numbers) see you as walking at about 299999999.00000000667 m/s. This comes from the Einstein velocity addition formula, which for a guy walking at speed v in a plane with speed u means his velocity s with respect to the ground is

1.png

The "why" for all of this is tricky, but within reach for an interested person with a decent grasp of algebra. Of course there's lots of good websites, but it's probably hard to beat Einstein's own book "Relativity: The Special and the General Theory". And I myself will write up the derivations here one of these days.

Thanks for reading!

Matt

Share on Facebook
Share on StumbleUpon
Share on Facebook
Find more posts in: Physical Science

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/89710

Comments

1

And there's the interesting case when u=c => s=c. (I suppose not really that interesting as that's axiomatic, but nice and tidy!)

Posted by: Fergus Gallagher | January 7, 2009 12:28 PM

2

It defies intuition, but it makes perfect sense.

I really need to take a physics class. Or two. :P

Posted by: Kobra | January 7, 2009 1:26 PM

3

The length contraction would also make the ship appear extremely short, would it not? I wonder - would the relativistic changes keep the time it takes to traverse the ship constant?

Posted by: Jolly Bloger | January 7, 2009 3:09 PM

4

... and of course you'd be fried by the microwave background radiation blue-shifted into bullet-hard gamma rays.

Posted by: csrster | January 7, 2009 3:15 PM

5

Of course, from the POV of you in the spaceship, the spaceship is not moving at 299999999 ms/s - it is *stationary*. And full-length.

Posted by: Paul Murray | January 8, 2009 12:35 AM

6

Surely, we can protect ourselves from bullet hard gamma rays! Oth, just what do ordinary bullet hard gamma rays become?

Posted by: Oldfart | January 8, 2009 9:03 AM

7

To pick up on your aircraft example, do the laws of conservation of momentum not mean that if you were to accelerate yourself forwards to say 1mph, then there would be a corresponding DECREASE in the ground speed of the aircraft?

Not a big change for an average human in a Jumbo Jet, but possibly far more important in a space craft?

Posted by: Mike | January 18, 2009 1:26 PM

Post a Comment

(Email address is entirely optional, but a consistent email - fake is fine - helps the system identify repeat commenters as not spam.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

© 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.