Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

## Re: [MATH for FUN] Urgent Question on Time Dilatation!!! HALP!!!!

Expand Messages
• I don t have an answer to your question, but the name of the phenomenon is time dilation . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation stevo ... [Non-text
Message 1 of 7 , Dec 7, 2009
• 0 Attachment
I don't have an answer to your question, but the name of the phenomenon is
"time dilation".

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

stevo

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 6:52 AM, ldc_founder1 <ldc_founder1@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> Theories on time dilatation may have its controversies. But lets assume
> that it is real.
>
> The more an object moves in a speed close to the speed of light, the less
> time is experienced by the object compared to an observer not moving in such
> speed.
>
> For example if an object moves with the speed of 0.7c (whereas c=speed of
> light) for 100 years (according to an observer not moving to such speed).
> This object will only experience 71.4 years instead of 100.
>
> Now what if the object moves with exactly the speed of light, assuming that
> yes there are other objects that can move with the speed of light?
> This object will experience 0 years instead of 100.
>
> Question is, for the object moving in such speed of life, what will happen?
>
> A. Does this mean that this object can cover any distance with 0 amount of
> time?
>
> or B. Since although speed is 3 x 10^8 m/s, but with t=0, a simple S=vxt
> will result in zero distance? Or in other words, this object can not cover
> any distance at all?
>
> Answers very much needed..
>
> Thank you very much :)
>
> PS: Believe it or not, this is for a philosophy research :)
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• Thanks for posting this, ldc_founder1; this will be my next big thing to spend an enjoyable couple of hours looking into!
Message 2 of 7 , Dec 7, 2009
• 0 Attachment
Thanks for posting this, ldc_founder1; this will be my next big thing to spend an enjoyable couple of hours looking into!

--- In mathforfun@yahoogroups.com, Steven Lytle <lytlesw@...> wrote:
>
> I don't have an answer to your question, but the name of the phenomenon is
> "time dilation".
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
>
> stevo
>
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 6:52 AM, ldc_founder1 <ldc_founder1@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Theories on time dilatation may have its controversies. But lets assume
> > that it is real.
> >
> > The more an object moves in a speed close to the speed of light, the less
> > time is experienced by the object compared to an observer not moving in such
> > speed.
> >
> > For example if an object moves with the speed of 0.7c (whereas c=speed of
> > light) for 100 years (according to an observer not moving to such speed).
> > This object will only experience 71.4 years instead of 100.
> >
> > Now what if the object moves with exactly the speed of light, assuming that
> > yes there are other objects that can move with the speed of light?
> > This object will experience 0 years instead of 100.
> >
> > Question is, for the object moving in such speed of life, what will happen?
> >
> > A. Does this mean that this object can cover any distance with 0 amount of
> > time?
> >
> > or B. Since although speed is 3 x 10^8 m/s, but with t=0, a simple S=vxt
> > will result in zero distance? Or in other words, this object can not cover
> > any distance at all?
> >
> > Answers very much needed..
> >
> > Thank you very much :)
> >
> > PS: Believe it or not, this is for a philosophy research :)
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
• Stevo, I think time dilatation is used occasionally (an acceptable variant). The phrase ... object will experience is vague. Generally only sentient beings
Message 3 of 7 , Dec 7, 2009
• 0 Attachment
Stevo, I think "time dilatation" is used occasionally (an acceptable variant).

The phrase "... object will experience" is vague. Generally only sentient beings or devices can experience things, but those things have mass and no massive object can travel at the speed of light. The answer to the question what would [a massive object] experience if it could travel at the speed of light is always the same: It can't.

Time dilation refers to the fact that an object like a clock runs at a slower rate when moving than it does at rest. If something is travelling at speed c in one frame of reference (four dimensional coordinate system x,y,z,t) then it travels at speed c in every other frame as well. Therefore anything (like light) travelling at speed c has NO rest frame and since it has no rest frame the concept of time dilation doesn't apply to it.

--- In mathforfun@yahoogroups.com, "ldc_founder1" <ldc_founder1@...> wrote:
>
>
> Theories on time dilatation may have its controversies. But lets assume that it is real.
>
> The more an object moves in a speed close to the speed of light, the less time is experienced by the object compared to an observer not moving in such speed.
>
> For example if an object moves with the speed of 0.7c (whereas c=speed of light) for 100 years (according to an observer not moving to such speed).
> This object will only experience 71.4 years instead of 100.
>
> Now what if the object moves with exactly the speed of light, assuming that yes there are other objects that can move with the speed of light?
> This object will experience 0 years instead of 100.
>
> Question is, for the object moving in such speed of life, what will happen?
>
> A. Does this mean that this object can cover any distance with 0 amount of time?
>
> or B. Since although speed is 3 x 10^8 m/s, but with t=0, a simple S=vxt will result in zero distance? Or in other words, this object can not cover any distance at all?
>
> Answers very much needed..
>
> Thank you very much :)
>
> PS: Believe it or not, this is for a philosophy research :)
>
• While dilatation is indeed used occasionally, I suggest that it is *not*acceptable, and should be considered a typo for dilation . pItlh stevo ... [Non-text
Message 4 of 7 , Dec 7, 2009
• 0 Attachment
While "dilatation" is indeed used occasionally, I suggest that it is
*not*acceptable, and should be considered a typo for "dilation". pItlh

stevo

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:18 AM, video_ranger <video_ranger@...>wrote:

>
>
> Stevo, I think "time dilatation" is used occasionally (an acceptable
> variant).
>
> The phrase "... object will experience" is vague. Generally only sentient
> beings or devices can experience things, but those things have mass and no
> massive object can travel at the speed of light. The answer to the question
> what would [a massive object] experience if it could travel at the speed of
> light is always the same: It can't.
>
> Time dilation refers to the fact that an object like a clock runs at a
> slower rate when moving than it does at rest. If something is travelling at
> speed c in one frame of reference (four dimensional coordinate system
> x,y,z,t) then it travels at speed c in every other frame as well. Therefore
> anything (like light) travelling at speed c has NO rest frame and since it
> has no rest frame the concept of time dilation doesn't apply to it.
>
>
> --- In mathforfun@yahoogroups.com <mathforfun%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "ldc_founder1" <ldc_founder1@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Theories on time dilatation may have its controversies. But lets assume
> that it is real.
> >
> > The more an object moves in a speed close to the speed of light, the less
> time is experienced by the object compared to an observer not moving in such
> speed.
> >
> > For example if an object moves with the speed of 0.7c (whereas c=speed of
> light) for 100 years (according to an observer not moving to such speed).
> > This object will only experience 71.4 years instead of 100.
> >
> > Now what if the object moves with exactly the speed of light, assuming
> that yes there are other objects that can move with the speed of light?
> > This object will experience 0 years instead of 100.
> >
> > Question is, for the object moving in such speed of life, what will
> happen?
> >
> > A. Does this mean that this object can cover any distance with 0 amount
> of time?
> >
> > or B. Since although speed is 3 x 10^8 m/s, but with t=0, a simple S=vxt
> will result in zero distance? Or in other words, this object can not cover
> any distance at all?
> >
> > Answers very much needed..
> >
> > Thank you very much :)
> >
> > PS: Believe it or not, this is for a philosophy research :)
> >
>
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
• ... Stevo, OK I ll take your word.
Message 5 of 7 , Dec 8, 2009
• 0 Attachment
--- In mathforfun@yahoogroups.com, Steven Lytle <lytlesw@...> wrote:
>
> While "dilatation" is indeed used occasionally, I suggest that it is
> *not*acceptable, and should be considered a typo for "dilation". pItlh
>
> stevo
>

Stevo, OK I'll take your word.
• ... Dilatation, while usually a medical term, means the condition of being dilated or stretched beyond normal dimensions Perhaps contemplating time dilation
Message 6 of 7 , Dec 9, 2009
• 0 Attachment
--- In mathforfun@yahoogroups.com, Steven Lytle <lytlesw@...> wrote:
>
> While "dilatation" is indeed used occasionally, I suggest that it is
> *not*acceptable, and should be considered a typo for "dilation". pItlh
>
> stevo
>

Dilatation, while usually a medical term, means
"the condition of being dilated or stretched beyond normal dimensions"

Perhaps contemplating time dilation AT the speed of light (or beyond) is exactly that - as reaching the speed of light is certainly beyond normal (x,y,z,t) dimensions.

Peter
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.