Relative velocity time dilation
When two observers are in relative uniform motion and uninfluenced by any gravitational mass, the point of view of each will be that the other's (moving) clock is ticking at a slower rate than the local clock.
The faster the relative velocity, the greater the magnitude of time dilation. This case is sometimes called special relativistic time dilation. It is often interpreted as time "slowing down" for the other (moving) clock.
But that is only true from the physical point of view of the local observer, and of others at relative rest (i.e. in the local observer's frame of reference).
The point of view of the other observer will be that again the local clock (this time the other clock) is correct and it is the distant moving one that is slow.
From a local perspective, time registered by clocks that are at rest with respect to the local frame of reference (and far from any gravitational mass) always appears to pass at the same rate.
Gravitational time dilation
There is another case of time dilation, where both observers are differently situated in their distance from a significant gravitational mass, such as (for terrestrial observers) the Earth or the Sun.
One may suppose for simplicity that the observers are at relative rest (which is not the case of two observers both rotating with the Earth—an extra factor described below).
In the simplified case, the general theory of relativity describes how, for both observers, the clock that is closer to the gravitational mass, i.e. deeper in its "gravity well", appears to go slower than the clock that is more distant from the mass (or higher in altitude away from the center of the gravitational mass).
That does not mean that the two observers fully agree: each still makes the local clock to be correct; the observer more distant from the mass (higher in altitude) measures the other clock (closer to the mass, lower in altitude) to be slower than the local correct rate, and the observer situated closer to the mass (lower in altitude) measures the other clock (farther from the mass, higher in altitude) to be faster than the local correct rate. They agree at least that the clock nearer the mass is slower in rate and on the ratio of the difference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilat ... e_dilation
Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
Forum rules
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. Random guest posting.
It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. Random guest posting.
- annielaurie
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:07 am
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
Here is some info on time dilation,
.
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11787
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
Annie,
Yep... got all that.
IOf you understand it too we can have a great discussion.
What we need to find is an area that is interesting that we may not fully agree on.
Yep... got all that.
IOf you understand it too we can have a great discussion.
What we need to find is an area that is interesting that we may not fully agree on.
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
- annielaurie
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 7:07 am
- Super Nova
- Posts: 11787
- Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 12:49 am
- Location: Overseas
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
OK.
I think the natural end status for humanity is that we will evolve through technology in one of 2 ways.. ending up at the same point.
1. We will develop elements like the brain that will be wired into a machine. Like the Darleks and go out into the universe.
2. We will trully build a living machine that will quickly evolve and go out into the universe.
Either will result in the human race dying out leaving behind the machines as our legacy for all time.
We are just the stepping stone to a machine inteligence.
I think the natural end status for humanity is that we will evolve through technology in one of 2 ways.. ending up at the same point.
1. We will develop elements like the brain that will be wired into a machine. Like the Darleks and go out into the universe.
2. We will trully build a living machine that will quickly evolve and go out into the universe.
Either will result in the human race dying out leaving behind the machines as our legacy for all time.
We are just the stepping stone to a machine inteligence.
Always remember what you post, send or do on the internet is not private and you are responsible.
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
You misjudge the human survival instinct.Super Nova wrote:OK.
I think the natural end status for humanity is that we will evolve through technology in one of 2 ways.. ending up at the same point.
1. We will develop elements like the brain that will be wired into a machine. Like the Darleks and go out into the universe.
2. We will trully build a living machine that will quickly evolve and go out into the universe.
Either will result in the human race dying out leaving behind the machines as our legacy for all time.
We are just the stepping stone to a machine inteligence.
- skippy
- Posts: 5239
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:48 pm
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
Yea but its a very interesting concept. Maybe there will be wars in the future between man and machine.Wile E. Coyote wrote:You misjudge the human survival instinct.Super Nova wrote:OK.
I think the natural end status for humanity is that we will evolve through technology in one of 2 ways.. ending up at the same point.
1. We will develop elements like the brain that will be wired into a machine. Like the Darleks and go out into the universe.
2. We will trully build a living machine that will quickly evolve and go out into the universe.
Either will result in the human race dying out leaving behind the machines as our legacy for all time.
We are just the stepping stone to a machine inteligence.
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
More realistically as machines become more advanced, so too will humans become more integrated with them. We already computer chip the brain for various reasons.skippy wrote:Yea but its a very interesting concept. Maybe there will be wars in the future between man and machine.Wile E. Coyote wrote:You misjudge the human survival instinct.Super Nova wrote:OK.
I think the natural end status for humanity is that we will evolve through technology in one of 2 ways.. ending up at the same point.
1. We will develop elements like the brain that will be wired into a machine. Like the Darleks and go out into the universe.
2. We will trully build a living machine that will quickly evolve and go out into the universe.
Either will result in the human race dying out leaving behind the machines as our legacy for all time.
We are just the stepping stone to a machine inteligence.
-
- Posts: 10231
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:52 pm
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
For generations, parents have mused about the very notion of locating their kids off-button.
I think X-boxes and computers come with one don't they?
I think X-boxes and computers come with one don't they?
- Bart
- Posts: 1684
- Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:51 am
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
The concept of humans having mechanical brains quickly was dismissed once the stupid robot dance came about
Women...if they had brains they'd be men
-
- Posts: 10231
- Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:52 pm
Re: Sci - Goldilocks planet is no fairytale
No wait, Gillards mouldy mung-bean twist is making a come-back...second only to the Rudd-bot-dance.Bart wrote:The concept of humans having mechanical brains quickly was dismissed once the stupid robot dance came about
Yes, and the self-destruct button is a ALP factory standard.
Latham coined it when he referred to the ALP's process as machine politics.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests