Yes time and space relationship

Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity

yes time and space relationship

The theory of special relativity explains how space and time are linked for . So yes, when astronaut Scott Kelly spent nearly a year aboard the. In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that fuses the three dimensions of space and the one dimension of time into The before-after relationship observed for timelike-separated events remains unchanged no matter what the. The reason is that space and time aren't quite independent. Things that are farther away are also, in a sense, earlier. And this relationship.

What Is Spacetime, Really?

Another problem with relative speeds is they would show that the laws of electromagnetism change depending on your vantage point, which contradicted classical physics as well which said the laws of physics were the same for everyone. This led to Einstein's eventual musings on the theory of special relativity, which he broke down into the everyday example of a person standing beside a moving train, comparing observations with a person inside the train.

I Need Space In My Relationship: Asking For Space In Relationship Or A Marriage

He imagined the train being at a point in the track equally between two trees. If a bolt of lightning hit both trees at the same time, due to the motion of the train, the person on the train would see the bolt hit one tree before the other tree. But the person beside the track would see simultaneous strikes. Learn the basics of Einstein's theory of relativity in our infographic here.

By Karl Tate, Infographics Artist One of the most famous equations in mathematics comes from special relativity.

yes time and space relationship

If mass is somehow totally converted into energy, it also shows how much energy would reside inside that mass: This equation is one of the demonstrations for why an atomic bomb is so powerful, once its mass is converted to an explosion.

This equation also shows that mass increases with speed, which effectively puts a speed limit on how fast things can move in the universe. Simply put, the speed of light c is the fastest velocity at which an object can travel in a vacuum. As an object moves, its mass also increases.

Near the speed of light, the mass is so high that it reaches infinity, and would require infinite energy to move it, thus capping how fast an object can move. The only reason light moves at the speed it does is because photons, the quantum particles that make up light, have a mass of zero. A special situation in the universe of the small, called "quantum entanglement," is confusing because it seems to involve quantum particles interacting with each other at speeds faster than the speed of light.

Specifically, measuring the property of one particle can instantly tell you the property of another particle, no matter how far away they are. Much has been written about this phenomenon, which is still not fully explained in terms of Einstein's conclusions. Another strange conclusion of Einstein's work comes from the realization that time moves relative to the observer. An object in motion experiences time dilation, meaning that time moves more slowly when one is moving, than when one is standing still.

The term observer refers to the entire ensemble of clocks associated with one inertial frame of reference.

What Is Spacetime, Really?—Stephen Wolfram Blog

A real observer, however, will see a delay between the emission of a signal and its detection due to the speed of light. To synchronize the clocks, in the data reduction following an experiment, the time when a signal is received will be corrected to reflect its actual time were it to have been recorded by an idealized lattice of clocks. In many books on special relativity, especially older ones, the word "observer" is used in the more ordinary sense of the word.

It is usually clear from context which meaning has been adopted. Physicists distinguish between what one measures or observes after one has factored out signal propagation delaysversus what one visually sees without such corrections.

History of special relativity and History of Lorentz transformations Figure Michelson and Morley expected that motion through the aether would cause a differential phase shift between light traversing the two arms of their apparatus.

  • Time Travel Isn't Possible…Or Is It?

The most logical explanation of their negative result, aether dragging, was in conflict with the observation of stellar aberration. By the mids, various experiments such as the observation of the Arago spot a bright point at the center of a circular object's shadow due to diffraction and differential measurements of the speed of light in air versus water were considered to have proven the wave nature of light as opposed to a corpuscular theory.

For example, the Fizeau experiment of demonstrated that the speed of light in flowing water was less than the sum of the speed of light in air plus the speed of the water by an amount dependent on the water's index of refraction. Among other issues, the dependence of the partial aether-dragging implied by this experiment on the index of refraction which is dependent on wavelength led to the unpalatable conclusion that aether simultaneously flows at different speeds for different colors of light.

No length changes occur in directions transverse to the direction of motion.

yes time and space relationship

Is there any arrangement of matter and energy the stuff that warps space-time to permit the existence of closed time-like curves, or CTCs? I know this is jargon but it's a fun phrase to toss around at parties. Creators of science fiction love to play with time travel, but is such a thing possible in the real universe? BBC The possibilities are finite There are about half a dozen known configurations of space-time that allow CTCs, or time travel into the past.

But what if we were to construct an infinitely long massive cylinder and set it spinning on its axis near the speed of light. It would drag on space-time around it, and certain paths around that spinning cylinder would end up in their own past. Good thing there are no infinitely long massive cylinders in the universe, or we might have to worry. Wait, I've got one: If you make a wormhole a shortcut between two distant locations in space-time and send one end racing off near the speed of light and bring it back, the normal time-dilation effects would put one end in the "future" of the other, so you could waltz right through the wormhole throat and end up in your past.

Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity

Wormholes require "negative mass" to exist, and negative mass does not exist in the universe? Nope It's the same story every time pardon the too-hard-to-resist pun. For every scenario we concoct in general relativity to allow CTCs and time travel into our own past, nature finds a way to confound our plans and rule out the scenario. General relativity allows — in principle — time travel into the past, but it appears to be ruled out in every case. It seems like something funny is afoot, that there ought to be some fundamental rule to disallow time travel.

But there isn't one. We can't point to any particle interaction at the subatomic level that clearly prevents the formation of CTCs.