1
$\begingroup$

It has been started quite often that you can only determine if an object is moving relative to a point you select, and that space itself can not yield any such reference frame. Couldn't you, however, use the amount of time dilation experienced when moving in any given direction to narrow down an actual fixed reference frame within space? Sorry if there's a lot I'm missing, it just struck me as odd though I know there must be an explanation.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Couldn't you, however, use the amount of time dilation experienced when moving in any given direction

I apologise if I misunderstand you, but you won't notice any time dilation, you will, no matter your what velocity, always see time moving normally.

As far as you are concerned, it's everybody else who is moving relative to you, that has issues with time, but you won't feel any different, no matter what, when other people look at you and see that time is slowing down for you, compared to them, because you are moving faster than them.

So everybody moving in space thinks it's the other guy whose time is slowing down, and that they are operating normally.

If I could put it another way, you look up at a plane flying at 500 mph, and think, that plane is really moving, if you see it getting closer to a cloud. But when you are in the plane, you might feel turbulence up and down, but you don't feel any sense of moving forward, even though you are flying at 500 mph.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry if I didn't phrase it too well. What I'm asking is if you could use an observer to find how much time dilation another object experiences when moving in any given direction at any given speed, could you use that to eventually narrow down on a velocity of the object relative to the observer where the object experiences minimal time dilation, and is thus fixed in space? $\endgroup$
    – sbergeron
    Aug 30 '16 at 12:14
  • $\begingroup$ Again, we both know this is a difficult question to phrase, I appreciate that, so let me concentrate on the easiest bit of your question, on the last line. There is no fixed in space point to use as a reference for time comparisons. Therefore there is no minimal time dilatation. $\endgroup$
    – user108787
    Aug 30 '16 at 12:21
  • $\begingroup$ Here is another reason that there is no real reference point in space, at large space and timescales, I apologise if I am not answering your question in terms that make sense to you physics.stackexchange.com/questions/274714/… $\endgroup$
    – user108787
    Aug 30 '16 at 14:28
  • $\begingroup$ I may have a different way of phrasing things: if you took an object that moves along a line while rotating across the plane it moves on (a top moving in a straight line across a table top) would any vector that extends from the center of the object through the equator that is at a fixed angle to the line it moves along . Would the point where the vector is experience more time dilation, and if so could the first vector be adjusted in how fast the sphere moves along it to make any time dilation around the sphere consistent so center of sphere "doesn't move in space?" $\endgroup$
    – sbergeron
    Aug 31 '16 at 14:55
  • $\begingroup$ Here's an (admittedly terribly done) diagram to help explain: s17.postimg.org/k7qr2np4v/vector.png $\endgroup$
    – sbergeron
    Aug 31 '16 at 14:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.