Remember, also, that according to the photon no time or space was crossed.
Sorry to interrupt but I have a question. And, also, I am far less knowledgable than everyone else on this topic, but I am still interested in the discussion, and will try to limit it to this one question: are you saying that from the photon's frame of reference no time or space was crossed? Does my frame of reference from earth change anything?
I can't wrap my head around this. How can something that travels through space at c not be traveling through space?
The lorentz contraction of space is given by, L = Lo âˆš(1 - v2/c2). Look what happens when velocity approaches the speed of light, v â€“â€º c. (v/c)2 = (c/c)2 = 12 = 1; âˆš(1 - 1) = 0; And, 0 â€¢ Lo = 0 = L. Length is reduced to zero. How long would it take to go zero distance?
So, Lorentz Contraction suggests that an object that is moving relative to a stationary observer is actually contracting, but from the frame of reference of the moving object it appears unchanged?
abE: Let me clarify this, if I can, and please correct me if I'm wrong: two objects, one that is moving and one that is stationary, experience time differently. The moving object experiences less time than the stationary object, and the amount is based upon the Lorentz Contraction formula?
The key word is 'relative'. Relative to the photon we are moving towards it.
One fact I absorbed from the vid is that, essentially, all motion is relative to the frame of reference of the observer, but the acceleration is constant.
Regarding the twin paradox, the twin that leaves earth at .99% the SOL and travels for six months only to make a return trip of six months will have aged roughly one year, while the twin left on the earth will have aged roughly 7.1 years? And the only evidence that the twin leaving earth was actually moving was the acceleration they experienced? Otherwise, there would have been no way of knowing which one was moving and which wasn't?
The amount is based on the behavior of the Universe and we can calculate it with the Lorentz's formula , but yes.
Yes, my wording was a bit loose and reckless.
Ok, let's see; the Lorentz Contraction formula is used to comprehend the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment, which was conducted to measure the once-believed "ether" that existed in the universe. The LC formula is used to measure the effects of time dilation, and length contraction. In additon, motion, time, length, and even simultaneity, are relative to the frame of reference.
Lastly, movement affects location (latitude, longitude, and altitude) which affects time. Does this sound right? Am I missing an important piece of the puzzle? I feel like I have an incoherent collection of facts that will not herd together.
abe: Thank you greatly for the help you have provided. :) I feel indebted to all that have helped me.
I've seen arguments against the twin paradox that go something like: according to relativity, its all based on your frame of reference. So, to the twin on the spaceship, the earth is moving away at 99% SoL and the twin on earth should be the one that is younger, not the one on the spaceship. But we know that the spaceship is the one moving because it is the one that is experiencing the acceleration.
Yes, the physics professor in the video provided by onifre goes over this. This is great. Thanks for your help. :)