Timeline for How can we explain the position of Mann's planet when travelling on Miller's planet in Interstellar movie?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 28, 2016 at 20:10 | comment | added | Ken G | I mean that you can do a calculation, even using Newton's gravity, to calculate the speed the Moon needs to have to orbit Earth. Then you can go on an interstellar mission that takes you only one day, but is a month back on Earth. You cannot use the speed you calculated for the Moon and multiply by one day to get how far it moves, because you can easily calculate that a month will have gone by for the Moon. This doesn't mean the Moon is suddenly not obeying Newton's laws, it means you are in a noninertial frame and are matching up your "nows" with the Moon's in a new way. | |
| Dec 28, 2016 at 20:04 | comment | added | Copernic | You wrote: "in the presence of gravity, you can get things to appear to move faster than an actual velocity that you would expect for an orbit" A faster move in a dilated frame??? | |
| Dec 28, 2016 at 19:57 | comment | added | Ken G | It still sounds the same to me, but either way, the answer is, the person who thinks it happened in 1 day just thinks it happened faster. When matching up "nows" nonlocally, whether in a noninertial frame or in the presence of gravity, you can get things to appear to move faster than an actual velocity that you would expect for an orbit, and so forth. | |
| Dec 28, 2016 at 19:23 | comment | added | Copernic | It is not the same. You could imagine travel from one altitude to the other is instantaneous. Then the paradox is absolutely not the same as twin paradox. The question is how 23 years of MANN's planet trajectory can match with only 1 day of its trajectory. | |
| Dec 28, 2016 at 19:19 | history | answered | Ken G | CC BY-SA 3.0 |