What's new

Universe

.
Well said, though interesting thing is science often gets a kick start when things are in a state of flux or in turnmoil like during war times. They often do say Necessity is the mother of inventions.

If you look at last 50 years most of the breakthroughs have been incremental not transformational in nature. I remember during 60s the optimism was so high but then somehow we got stuck in the rut.



Now that I think about it absolutely true. But we do know about the planetary mechanics and Sun's mass is responsible for earth orbiting around the sun.

Technically though you are right.
True but that is an idealistic view actually which doesn't factor in the effect of gravity. Our earth is not strictly an inertial frame.

The acceleration vector calculations for the inter-space travel assumes the sun to be an inertial frame and does all the calculations w.r.t it.

indeed strictly speaking of course we do know that the earth orbits the sun and not the other way around but as i was saying, using earth as the center works, the math just gets a lot complicated,
 
. . .
Will anyone clear my doubt ?

Person A travels with the speed of light . Goes to a Planet 1 light year away and then returns .
He has spend 2 years but the planet he returned to is 200 years in to the future .

How ????????????
This questions gives me a severe headache .

Also will an object disintegrate while moving at the speed of light ???
 
.
People confused with imagining relativity kindly tune to the below videos



Thanks really informative, refreshed the basics for me. Wish we had them back when i was breaking my head preparing for fundamentals of physics paper for freshman year couple of decades back.
 
.
People confused with imagining relativity kindly tune to the below videos


Ok but this still doesn't clarify the two spaceship problem. First of all if the spaceships were moving at almost the speed of light (a little less than c) then everything makes sense, but with a hypothetical object that could achieve c it still does not fit.
 
.
Has science been evolved from philosophy and philosophy from religion?But one thing is for sure,primitive science was a branch of philosophy!
Might be,we are not seeking the links b/w these three,hence failing to get the bigger picture?

regards

This might sound weird but it my opinion that there is no big picture. We should stop thinking that humankind is some how special and we are meant to discover these theories. This journey of unravelling "truths" and "divinity" would continue for a long long time.

Catch is not to kill each other in the process. :D
 
.
Will anyone clear my doubt ?

Person A travels with the speed of light . Goes to a Planet 1 light year away and then returns .
He has spend 2 years but the planet he returned to is 200 years in to the future .

How ????????????
This questions gives me a severe headache .

Also will an object disintegrate while moving at the speed of light ???
Anything with mass cannot reach the speed of light. I would suggest that you watch the video i shared and the video providence shared for better understanding of your question.
 
.
This might sound weird but it my opinion that there is no big picture. We should stop thinking that humankind is some how special and we are meant to discover these theories. This journey of unravelling "truths" and "divinity" would continue for a long long time.

Catch is not to kill each other in the process. :D
:lol:
Excellent,
Let us look at the other way around,what if we realize that we all are special,not insects..might be this make us respect each other and to give importance to each other's lives,hence not killing each other?:D

Regards
 
.
@Kashmiri Pandit @mithyaa LOL

I would have to do a bunch of typing to try to explain those complex things. You guys can either wait for me to type or explore youtube/google. And my typing speed is horribly slow for a ex-coder.
 
.
Will anyone clear my doubt ?

Person A travels with the speed of light . Goes to a Planet 1 light year away and then returns .
He has spend 2 years but the planet he returned to is 200 years in to the future .

How ????????????
This questions gives me a severe headache .

strictly speaking, anything with mass CANNOT travel at the speed of light. but you can get close.

your scenario is flawed btw. a person traveling at the speed of light to a star one light year away and back would NOT see a planet aged 200 years.

the planet would be aged exactly 2 years. however the person doing the traveling would not experience two years of travel he or she would experience less time depending how fast they were traveling, if extremely close to the speed of light that person may have experienced only 1 sec of travel time.

this is because the universe has a speed limited and time and velocity is related so the faster you travel the less time you would experience compared to the rest of the universe.

so if i travel at close to the speed of light for 100 light years out then 100 light years back, the planet may be aged 200 years, but i would feel as though ive only traveled for 2 years.

Also will an object disintegrate while moving at the speed of light ???

nothing with mass can move at the speed of light, it would take more energy than available in the entire universe. but suppose that we can, if you do a smooth acceleration there no reason why something would simply disintegrate, unless that is, it hits something. which since it take more energy than available in the universe to accelerate it to the speed of light, it would be a mighty big explosion if it hits something(big bang sized one), anything, a neutron even.
 
.
Person A travels with the speed of light . Goes to a Planet 1 light year away and then returns .
He has spend 2 years but the planet he returned to is 200 years in to the future .

It has to do with space time curvature. Gravity also effects how time is passes - the time in your frame will pass normally for you but if you compare the passage of time within your frame to outside your frame of reference there will be a difference.

Also will an object disintegrate while moving at the speed of light ???

No, Well it actually depends. Within it's spatial bubble it would be intact but it would disintegrate outside the bubble so for an outside observer it would disintegrate. Am i making any sense :(

P.S. As others posters have suggested technically you can't travel at light speed but there are other theories :)
 
Last edited:
. .
@Kashmiri Pandit @mithyaa LOL

I would have to do a bunch of typing to try to explain those complex things. You guys can either wait for me to type or explore youtube/google. And my typing speed is horribly slow for a ex-coder.
Just minor clarifications would be nice. Were the objects travelling at the speed of light or slower than a little less than the speed of light?
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom