It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

time relative to speed

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   
I'm not sure if this has been talked about here before; if it has I apologize.
If time goes slower for matter that goes faster (relative to what I don't know, if you do please let me know) then what happens if an object were to slow or stop. If Earth is travelling at however fast, and our Solar system and the galaxy and the whole universe are all moving, presumably very fast, if we were to send, say a ship full of ingenious scientists out, and stop it from moving at all, or very nearly stop it, will time speed up for the inhabitants of the vessel? has there been any study on this? And wouldn't it be cool to send out a group of scientists for whom time travels more quickly, so that they can make advancements faster?




posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
If time goes slower for matter that goes faster (relative to what I don't know, if you do please let me know) then what happens if an object were to slow or stop.


Time goes slower relative to time experienced by an observer who is moving slower. If an object moves slower then an observer moving faster then the faster object could say that the slower object's time is moving faster. So yes an object moving slower then the earth would experience faster time (that is it would age quicker)

The idea of making scientists time faster would be cool maybe doing it for a whole colony that way when they die the research can keep going.

[edit on 30-1-2005 by TruthResearcher2000]



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
I wonder then if there is a 'minimum' speed; that is, if you stop completely, would you just instantaneously be sent to the 'end of the universe' if such a thing exists, or is there some time 'speed' that you can't go any 'slower ' than.



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
it depends weather or not the ship is traveling faster than the speed of light which is nearly impossible because the closer an objects velocity gets to the speed of light, the objects mass increases as well



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
I wonder then if there is a 'minimum' speed; that is, if you stop completely, would you just instantaneously be sent to the 'end of the universe' if such a thing exists, or is there some time 'speed' that you can't go any 'slower ' than.


Thats an interesting idea which I've been thinking about. When you slow down and time speeds up for you, you would see the rest of the universe as going slower so if you could be at a complete stop perhaps it would apear that the rest of time had stopped. Somone observing you would see you age at an infinant speed and die long before the end of the universe.

But I think zero velocity is imposible even the electrons of atoms are always moving



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Yeah, I think there probably would be a minimum. Another thing I thought of though, If mass increases as one approaches the speed of light, the opposite must also be true. So how small is someone going to get as they slow down?



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
Yeah, I think there probably would be a minimum. Another thing I thought of though, If mass increases as one approaches the speed of light, the opposite must also be true. So how small is someone going to get as they slow down?

Since mass is energy and energy can't be destroyed then you couldn't go so slow as to have no mass/energy. However no matter what your speed if you measure your own mass/energy it's always the same.

[edit on 30-1-2005 by TruthResearcher2000]



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Time does not go slower for the object at a speed relative to another. So if an object stops or slows to a near halt, it experiences time just as it normally would. It is an observer travelling relative to that object that notices a time change in the other object...again experiencing time just as normal. If the slow moving object looked at the observer, it would see the observer also moving slower relative to his time experience.



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but don't we have the mass thing backward? I was thinking about it, and I thought that mass decreases as the object approaches the speed of light. Does someone know for sure?



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by templersstorms1312
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but don't we have the mass thing backward? I was thinking about it, and I thought that mass decreases as the object approaches the speed of light. Does someone know for sure?

It increases as the object aproaches the speed of light or rather an observer who's speed dose not increase would observe the objects mass to increase.



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
You cant slow down more than 0mph relative to something (negative numbers count as speed). Your actual energy and mass comes from your rest mass. Relativistic mass comes from your speed relative to another object. IE. our own suns rest mass, is much different to its relativistic mass relative to the centre of the andromeda galaxy. Rest mass is also wat u use in E=mc^2 i think, which means that something cant become a black hole the faster it goes.

If you went the same speed as someone in the same direction, you would both observe no change in your relativistic mass(relative to each other), or any time difference. You can observe this sort of thing happening when your on a motorway next to another car.

[edit on 30-1-2005 by quiksilver]



posted on Jan, 30 2005 @ 08:05 PM
link   
boost this to the top of the page



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join