Quantum Heraclitus:
I've never heard of Tetarac, no.
I've never heard of Tetarac, no.
Does Distance exist without time?
- Thread starter Quantum Quack
- Start date
I think you're leaving something out that it is notable. That is to say, your theory seems somehow incomplete, thus the reason why I (and seemingly others) do not even see why you suggest that time is needed to have distance.
Reiku,
It is according to which mechanism you use to measure 'time', and from which frame of reference you measure it in. You are using a velocity between points (things) that is dependent on your local atomic clock rate. If your clock slows relative to a clock in a different reference frame, you can travel a greater 'distance' between two ticks of your local clock, so you assume the distance has contracted from what is was before you began your trip. If your atomic clock stops, you are unable to measure distance, but that doesn't mean there is there is zero distance travelled. For instance, an atomic clock will stop ticking at the event horizon of a black hole. That doesn't mean no motion is possible though, as evidenced by astronomers and cosmologists measurements of some black holes rotating at near the speed of light. Assume a supermassive black hole that is large enough that tidal forces do not destroy an atomic clock that is sent to the event horizon. As the clock nears the event horizon, it will tick slower and slower relative to the local clock of an observer at infinity, but the observer at infinity will 'see' the clock orbiting faster and faster around the accreation disk as it approaches the event horizon. At the event horizon, the clock will stop but that does not mean the clock will suddenly stop moving, only that there will be an infinite amount of 'time' between ticks in that clock's reference frame. The clock can no longer use duration between ticks to measure distance in its own reference frame, but the motion of the clock has not 'frozen'.
The universe can come to an end, and the black hole can evaporate by Hawking radiation, along with the clock, before it ever makes the second 'tick' once the clock is at or inside the event horizon.
A lot of people make this mistake concerning the photon.
The terminology right now floating about is that the photon moves through zero-dimensions. It isn't technically true at all. The photon doesn't actually go anywhere from its frame of reference. Its birth and death are simultaneous, so it doesn't move at all, and certainly not through zero-dimensions.
You are right about the equation, but normally, i wouldn't have explained it, because a trained eye on the subject would normally not concern with such things. It is just interesting to note that E would resemble the unit of energy, of whatever kind, from a gluon to a photon, and that M is for mass, and the two are interchangable. Of course, it is, afterall, a shortcut of (A) ->
Virtual particles do not behave in the same way a real particle behaves under quantum rules. The equation that relates energy, mass and momentum in special relativity is:
(A)$$E^{2} = p^{2}c^{2} + M^{2}c^{4}$$,
But then, these mathematical qualities tend to change about, concerning other properties, like virtual particles, which do not totally abide by this giving a reduced equation of:
$$E^{2} = M^{2}c^{4}$$
This would mean that their kinetic energy does not have a usual relationship with their velocities and can indicate negative properties. One important application of this is the Casimir Effect. In this, it is required that all the potential particles in the vacuum be added together. This will create a small amount of negative energy that is called zero-point energy.
If you could reach the value of c, your clock would stop completely -- you would no longer move a distance in time, so then you cannot move through space. You cant move through one and not the other, according to relativity.
There is no absolute clock in the sky for one race of observers. But saying that, the events two observers experience, whilst they may not be identical, such as the duration of time passing in their frames, relativity has no place ti be biased about what events they experience in reference to each other.
As an example, a photon observers birth is simultaneously its death. According to it, it existed for only a single chronon, a billion part of the billionth part of the billionth part of the billionth part of the billionth part of one second. But a human observer, certainly measures it moving from A to B surely? Yes, but only from our frame of reference. Relativity cannot be biased, so whenever the photon is measured, to the photon, it never happens, because it simply doesn't have an age, other than a single chronon (the amount of time it took the photon to bubble out of the vacuum).
The photon never goes through a change, and yet it can be observed to collapse upon a measurement, pass through molecules, and even move from the sun, 15 million km away, and yet it never actually goes anywhere, does anything, or experience a world.
The human observer, is a walking, talking Tardyon (a system moving at v<c). Because of this, the world allows us to see this distorted world, as if there is some kind of time flowing past us, but the truth of the physics is, is that there is no flow of time at all. This is strictly created by the human psyche. Instead, we find in physics, that time is discontinuous in fleeting flashes of existence.
So these discontinuous frames, all exist in the present, and relativity predicts they are all frozen in time, like a fly stuck in amber. I refer you to Brian Greenes book, 'The Frozen Lake.'
Reiku,
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "reach the value of c", but since I was speaking of the event horizon of a black hole, I will assume you are somehow referring to gravitational time dilation. A clock can never travel at the speed of 'c', so that is immaterial. A clock at the event horizon of a black hole can travel the circumference of the event horizon, a distance.
Relativity Theory breaks down at the event horizon of a black hole. Time-like geodesics become space-like. Can you explain what prevents the clock from travelling along a space-like geodesic?
In General Relativity Theory, an observer (or clock) at infinity refers to a clock, or frame of reference, that is unaffected by gravitational time dilation (flat space-time). Special Theory makes use of local clocks, so there is not a 'single' clock that universally applies to all circumstances.
A 'photon observer' implies an observer that is not in the 'rest frame' of a photon. I placed rest frame in quotation because, in relativity theory, the use of a photon's rest frame is not permitted. If you are speaking of a photon's rest frame, you have deviated from relativity theory and into pseudoscience.
By value of ''c'', i was inquiring to light speed here. Even though, gravitational time warps are somewhat different to moving at luminal speeds, the effect of time dilation is still evident.
I would never have used rest frame, or any term ''rest'' to a photon... in this case, when i say from its frame of reference, i am referring to simply, the frame of reference, or its locality, which it doesn't really have one, if not, for a very brief moment in time, as explained.
About this tho...
''Relativity Theory breaks down at the event horizon of a black hole. Time-like geodesics become space-like. Can you explain what prevents the clock from travelling along a space-like geodesic?''
It breaks down, because the boundary is singularitarian-like. When we speak of timelike becoming spacelike, it doean't end there. Spacelike becomes timelike as well. So spacetime are reserved properly.
It just means that you begin to move through space without recourse, like you had in the time dimension, and you can now move about in the time dimension, like you had in space, back and forth.
Its caused by intense gravitational influences, and it somehow unravels them, and reconfigurates the vacuum from spacetime, to timespace.
Reiku:
What? What theory makes this claim?
Time travel is certainly not accepted from gravitational effects, as you are suggesting.
What? What theory makes this claim?
Time travel is certainly not accepted from gravitational effects, as you are suggesting.
If you where able to pass the boundary of a black hole unscathed, if time becomes spacelike, then space becomes timelike. Read:
''Parallel Universes, 1985'' Dr F. A. Wolf.
Its not that the gravity effects you, its that gravity as effected your surroundings as move faster and faster to the speed of light, falling dreadingly towards the center singularity.
''Parallel Universes, 1985'' Dr F. A. Wolf.
Its not that the gravity effects you, its that gravity as effected your surroundings as move faster and faster to the speed of light, falling dreadingly towards the center singularity.
Nope, as far as the clock is concerned, there is no "event" horizon, it just accelerates toward the center of the BH, presumably past c and into the singularity or whatever.2inq said:
The clock stops for an external observer, because once the clock is inside the horizon, no light can reach any external observer, who then sees only the last fading image of the clock, frozen at the moment it reaches (reached) the event horizon. But it keeps going, ticking merrily away in its own Lorentz frame, as it accelerates toward the center of mass.
Reiku:
This seems to be contradicted by the notion that gravity and speed slow down the actual atomic movement of the cesium clocks.
This seems to be contradicted by the notion that gravity and speed slow down the actual atomic movement of the cesium clocks.
well SRT states this if I am not mistaken...
I just wanted to learn if the board could supply proof that distance requires time. And so far I have found that if anyting SRT has said it does.
However again if one looks only at the moment between past and future we can say that distance does not exist because time is not present. Using SRT as a support for such proof.
take the time out of space and all you have left is space....and what is space?
Thus the thread has achieved it's purpose I guess.
Even though I disagree with SRT It has proved very useful...
Last edited:
There is no physical indication of an event horizon, the infalling clock/observer would have no method of determining where the event horizon 'began'. In the non-rotating Schwarzschild black hole, the clock would accelerate to the speed of light at the event horizon. The schwarzschild radius (the distance between the event horizon and the center singularity) would be contracted to zero as measured by that clock in that reference frame, so the clock would immediately be spaghettified and collide with the singularity before another tick could pass on the clock. In a rotating Kerr black hole, the clock would first enter the ergosphere if the black hole were approached parallel to the accretion disk. The Lense-Thirring effect would drag spacetime and the clock around the black hole faster and faster until it was travelling greater than the speed of light relative to an observer at infinity. However, once reaching the inner event horizon, the outcome would be the same. The distance between event horizon and the ring singularity would contract to zero as measured by that clock and the clock would be immediately destroyed before it could 'tick' another tick, to be radiated away as Hawking radiation.
Disk Universe Theory states our universe due to set-up conditions very early on is already in a disk-like shape.
Just thought i'd add that...