Home | Community | Message Board

MushroomMan Mycology
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. * 1
    #26312806 - 11/11/19 12:16 AM (4 years, 6 months ago)

Note: I will probably have to reframe this question later as I may not be posing it correctly.

This is my very simplistic understanding of the basics:

As an object's speed increases, it's mass also increases as the energy used to propel it gets added (not literally mathematically additive) to it's rest mass so that if it were to approach the speed of light, according to the Lorentz transformation, it's mass would approach infinity making it impossible for an object with mass to go the speed of light.

Here is my question(s):

If everything is relative, how can an objective speed be determined?

Let's try an example: two spaceships are in a hypothetical total void and are approaching each other at 1 million miles an hour, How could it be determined if one ship was at rest and the other moving at a million miles an hour or if both ships were travelling at 500K miles per hour? How does an object "know" it's speed (relative to what?) in order to increase it's mass? The crew on the faster moving ship would or would not be able to feel or measure their increased mass or it this merely an observer effect?

I know this is poorly worded and I am missing something (or several 'somethings') very key here.

:braindamage:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #26312894 - 11/11/19 01:57 AM (4 years, 6 months ago)

What do you mean by objective speed?

Leonard Susskind was kind enough to upload this lecture series, just FYI.  The Indian Ministry of Education also uploads a shitload of good lectures under the NPTEL channels.  Jeff Quitney also has a goldmine of curated educational films on Vimeo.  He used to have a Youtube channel, but Youtube unceremoniously obliterated it because he was hosting sixty year old Clorox ads.  Honestly studying the material that he's gathered could honestly make you a rocket scientist.  :shrug:


Edited by chibiabos (11/11/19 02:03 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLogicaL ChaosM
Ascension Energy & Alien UFOs
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/12/07
Posts: 70,093
Loc: The Inexpressible... Flag
Last seen: 3 days, 8 hours
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #26313211 - 11/11/19 08:23 AM (4 years, 6 months ago)

To my knowledge, increasing speed doesn't increase mass. It does however increase its inertial mass however:


Quote:

It's inertial mass increases as it approaches c, you can see this simply follows on from Chronos's last post. As in special relativity problems are usually approached from the point of view of spacetime, it's considered better to have a definition of mass that is Lorentz invariant (i.e. invariant with relative speed).

Source https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/speed-increases-mass.33552/




Inertial mass is when a force such as travelling velocity generates a "gravity field" around it, which is essentially what mass does (like a planet moving thru space).

https://www.britannica.com/science/gravity-physics/Gravitational-fields-and-the-theory-of-general-relativity#ref210883
Quote:

Inertial mass is a mass parameter giving the inertial resistance to acceleration of the body when responding to all types of force.




The relative nature of objects of travelling in space to each other is definitely something that confuses me greatly. How does a person determine speed in space when everything is moving a specific direction? Where should the point of reference be?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleOrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,441
Loc: Under the C
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: LogicaL Chaos]
    #26313435 - 11/11/19 10:24 AM (4 years, 6 months ago)

Quote:

To my knowledge, increasing speed doesn't increase mass. It does however increase its inertial mass however:




Thank you for the more accurate statement.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinechibiabos
Cosmic Pond Scum
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 03/16/17
Posts: 4,180
Last seen: 1 year, 2 months
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #26314536 - 11/11/19 07:29 PM (4 years, 6 months ago)

That's not an accurate statement.  There are no gravitational fields in relativity and inertial mass doesn't depend on velocity.

LC:  Go watch those lecture series and follow the links that I've been posting here whenever the topic comes up.  I keep on doing that because those will actually help you develop the context for the discussions that you want to have.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLoaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,011
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 9 days
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: chibiabos]
    #26325942 - 11/17/19 02:28 AM (4 years, 5 months ago)

I thought F = MA (force = mass x acceleration) so wouldn't force be the result of accelerated mass, not more mass?

Unless this is what is meant by "more mass", lol.


--------------------



"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLoaded Shaman
Psychophysiologist
Male User Gallery


Registered: 03/02/15
Posts: 8,011
Loc: Now O'Clock
Last seen: 1 month, 9 days
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #26325945 - 11/17/19 02:33 AM (4 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:

If everything is relative, how can an objective speed be determined?





By attempting to argue and assert constants, such as speed of light, gravity, and entropy.

I posted this in two other threads - it deals primarily with problems regarding "time travel", but I still think it's pertinent and useful to this discussion because it touches those same hypothetical bases regarding relativity:

Person A travels away at light speed from planet X, on which remains person B. He returns after five years to discover that person B has aged 20 years.  But let’s not focus on person A. Let’s shift our attention to B. Is it possible that he, like A, can be said to have “time traveled”? Why yes it is! With respect to the relativity of time, the temporal comparison between A and B is likewise relative... which means that to the same degree A has “time traveled” to the past with respect to B, B has “time traveled” to the FUTURE with respect to A.

If time is our plumbline, and time is relative, then this must be the case; it can't be any other way.

Let’s speak non-relatively for a second. From the point of view of A and B independent of each other, time has passed equally. That is, from their own independent frame of reference nothing has changed…time has passed the same as it always has. They're comfortably ensconced in their “perpetual present”. It's only when the relative comparison is made are there any temporal differences noted. So, this being the case…that is, the fact that time is only RELATIVELY different and not FUNDAMENTALLY different means that if person A has traveled to the future, and the change in time is INEXORABLY attached to the position of B, then person B must have traveled to the past in equal measure. The temporal relationship is proportionally inverse and fundamentally related. As one travels to the future the other travels equally to the past. Person A has gained time relative to person B, and B has lost time relative to A. Thus, despite the fact that A is the one who traveled at the speed of light, BOTH A and B have “time traveled”.

So the only way to “prove” time travel is to make a relative comparison, but as soon as we do that we must accept that both A and B have traveled in equal but inverse degrees, which means that time, on the whole, itself, hasn’t changed at all. Time is absolute. It, of itself, just IS. IT is constant; the change is purely the observer’s perception. Like an hour glass, the sand can shift from one side to the other, but the amount of sand remains constant. Any “change” is purely an abstraction. There is no OBJECTIVE change in how much sand is in the hour glass at any given moment. The sand itself just IS.

Time travel theory doesn’t prove the existence of time, time’s existence being implicit in the assertion that time can be traveled. Time is simply an abstract, mathematical construct spawned from man’s mind, as a function of the mind’s unique and extraordinary powers of conceptualization (I.E. a thread I tried to make in philosophy).


--------------------



"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one’s ignorance." — Confucius

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisiblebodhisattaMDiscordReddit
Smurf real estate agent
 User Gallery
Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/30/13
Posts: 61,891
Loc: Milky way
Re: Help with lightspeed/relativity understanding. [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #26326210 - 11/17/19 07:50 AM (4 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

OrgoneConclusion said:
Note: I will probably have to reframe this question later as I may not be posing it correctly.

This is my very simplistic understanding of the basics:

As an object's speed increases, it's mass also increases as the energy used to propel it gets added (not literally mathematically additive) to it's rest mass so that if it were to approach the speed of light, according to the Lorentz transformation, it's mass would approach infinity making it impossible for an object with mass to go the speed of light.

Here is my question(s):

If everything is relative, how can an objective speed be determined?

Let's try an example: two spaceships are in a hypothetical total void and are approaching each other at 1 million miles an hour, How could it be determined if one ship was at rest and the other moving at a million miles an hour or if both ships were travelling at 500K miles per hour? How does an object "know" it's speed (relative to what?) in order to increase it's mass? The crew on the faster moving ship would or would not be able to feel or measure their increased mass or it this merely an observer effect?

I know this is poorly worded and I am missing something (or several 'somethings') very key here.

:braindamage:



Both ships are also moving relative to other things like space itself or planets and stars. So the both of the ships have velocities that are apparent because of their relative motion compared to the substrate they're traveling in. You could make it appear as if only one ship was moving at 2m mph and the other one is standing still but that's just playing with perspectives

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Bulk Substrate   Myyco.com Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale   OlympusMyco.com Olympus Myco Bulk Substrate   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   MagicBag.co Certified Organic All-In-One Grow Bags


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Satellite Launch to Test Theory of Relativity
( 1 2 3 all )
Madtowntripper 4,390 42 12/16/05 06:14 PM
by zappaisgod
* 20 light-year wide particle accelerator spotted by astronomers MarioNett 2,190 18 04/16/05 11:06 AM
by Aeolus1369
* slowing the speed of light
( 1 2 all )
llamaboy 2,545 26 01/21/04 05:20 PM
by YidakiMan
* I want a better understanding of Chemistry...
( 1 2 all )
PDU 4,629 23 10/16/03 02:47 PM
by doktor_alternate
* The Oh-My-God Particle
( 1 2 all )
DiploidM 3,626 23 03/28/05 11:15 AM
by cybrbeast
* Is a time machine possible?
( 1 2 all )
daba 4,609 28 12/08/03 12:43 PM
by cyrus
* "And yet the anomalous thrust remains" HagbardCeline 361 3 12/03/15 08:48 AM
by Jean-Luc Picard
* Pythagorean Paradox?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Illusionofman 8,976 64 05/13/10 05:18 PM
by Diploid

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
366 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.017 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 12 queries.