- HubPages
*»* - Education and Science
*»* - Physics

# Does Motion Affect The Speed At Which Time Passes? (Part 4 of 4)

## Fact Is Truly Stranger Than Fiction – Nobody Can Dream This Stuff Up!

Before we proceed, let’s take a quick timeout to summarize the mind-numbing discoveries that we have thus far gleaned from Albert Einstein’s special theory of relativity, starting with his fundamental postulates and then carrying through to the time dilation and distance contraction phenomena.

- The
, also known as the*first postulate*, asserts that observers in a system which is moving in a*principle of relativity**straight line and at a constant speed*– that is to say, moving with*uniform, or non-accelerated motion*– cannot feel or sense this motion. In fact, the observers have every right to claim that*they*are the ones who are at rest and it is the outside world that is moving instead, because*all*of the laws of physics will operate in*exactly the same manner*for the observers as they will for those in the outside world. Therefore, there is*no**whole*of the physical universe, that will detect or reveal whether they are in uniform motion or at rest.*The two situations are equivalent*. - The
asserts the*second postulate*of the speed of light. In other words, it asserts that observers in relative uniform motion,*invariance**regardless**of what the relative speeds between them may be*, will*always**using*, to have the**their**respective rulers and clocks*constant*,*unchanging*value of 186,000 miles per second, or 669,600,000 miles per hour! This is indeed extremely bitter medicine to swallow (to say the*least*), because it goes against every grain of logic and common sense that we hold about the very intuitive concept of adding and subtracting relative speeds. But it is the*correct*medicine to ingest nonetheless, as the*invariance of the speed of light*has been confirmed by countless experiments, the most famous being that performed by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley in 1887.

- The
phenomenon arises as an unequivocal consequence of the*time dilation**reality*of special relativity’s two fundamental postulates, as we have discovered from our previous thought experiment concerning the photon clock aboard Scotty’s train. Due directly to the*second postulate*,*Scotty’s**relatively moving*photon clock ticks at a*slower*rate than*our**relatively stationary*photon clock,*as observed from*. This is the case, because**our**point of view*Scotty’s photon has to travel a longer distance to complete one tick than our photon does to do the same, and since his photon and our photon*. And since greater relative speeds mean longer and longer distances for Scotty’s photon to travel in order to complete one tick, then**must both travel at the same speed of light c**, it will thus take Scotty’s photon a greater amount of time to complete one tick than it takes our photon to complete one tick, as observed from**our**point of view*the greater the relative speed, the slower the (relatively) moving photon clock ticks*. Now, however, due directly to the*first postulate*,must and will observe*we**all*timekeeping devices,*all*physical processes, and indeed,aboard Scotty’s train, slow down by the*time itself*amount that his photon clock has slowed down! If this was*same**not*the case, thencould use the loss in synchronization between his photon clock and*Scotty**all*of the physical processes aboard his train to deduce thatwas the one that was truly, absolutely moving, which is a deduction that the*he**first postulate*assertsbe made! Thus,*cannot**time slows down for objects that are in relative uniform motion!*And just as greater relative speeds mean slower and slower ticking clocks, it therefore follows*from the first postulate*that greater relative speeds mean that*time itself*passes by more and more slowly!

- As the furious flight of the cosmic muons has demonstrated, the
phenomenon*distance contraction**(along the direction of relative motion)*, is an unequivocal consequence of the*time dilation*phenomenon. Muons, on average, live a very short life of only 2.2 x 10^{-6}seconds before they disintegrate.still observe, however, that, travelling at a*We*of 0.998*speed**c*, these muons are able to traverse the full height of our atmosphere and penetrate well beneath the earth’s surface, a journey that spans a distance of 34,184 feet,**relative to the earth**, and that takes a*as measured by our rulers**much longer*34.8 x 10^{-6}seconds of*normal*time,Hence, as observed from*as measured by our clocks!*point of view, it is the*our**time dilation*phenomenon that allows the muons to accomplish this feat*without**disintegrating before even coming close to the earth’s surface*. Since the relative speedis 0.998*between the earth and the muons**c*,observe that the passage of*we**time*for theis slowed down by a*muons**(time dilation) factor*of 15.82.,*THUS*observe their 2.2 x 10*we*^{-6}second lifespan to be*dilated, or stretched out*, over the course of (2.2 x 10^{-6}seconds) x (15.82), or 34.8 x 10^{-6}seconds of*our**normal*time, which is enough duration for them to penetrate well beneath the earth’s surface! As observed from thepoint of view, however, it is the*muon’s**distance contraction*phenomenon that allows the earth – which is, of course, travelling at a speed of 0.998*c*– to slam into it,*relative to the muon*from the*BECAUSE**muon’s**time is passing by at the***normal**rate, and so its internal clock is**not**running slowly at all.*AND*the equation for*SINCE**distance travelled*is*{ DISTANCE TRAVELLED = SPEED OF TRAVEL*x*TRAVEL TIME }*,, after a*THEN**normal*2.2 x 10^{-6}seconds of lifespan have elapsed on its internal clock, the muonfind itself*MUST**already*buried well beneath the earth’s surface as it disintegrates, after the earth has travelled a distance of only (0.998*c*) x (2.2 x 10^{-6}seconds) = (9.823 x 10^{8}feet/second) x (2.2 x 10^{-6}seconds), or only 2,161 feet towards it,*as measured by the*__muon’s__rulers!,*THEREFORE**from the*,**muon’s**perspective, the entire 34,184 feet of travel distance that**we**have measured must be**contracted,**or**compressed,**into the 2,161 feet of travel distance that the**muon**has measured!**HENCE***the*. Moreover, the**time dilation**that**we**observe happening to the**muon**results directly in the muon “seeing” a**contracted travel distance,**and therefore, distance contraction along the direction of relative motion is a direct result of time dilation*greater*the relative speed between the earth and the muon becomes, then thewill be the amount of time that*disproportionately less*observe to elapse on the*we*internal clock during its journey, because of the*muon’s**greater and greater*,effect of the*ever present**time dilation*phenomenon. And therefore, upon further examination of the above equation for*DISTANCE TRAVELLED*, we realize that even though the*SPEED OF TRAVEL*will indeed be*greater*, this greater speed will clearlybe able to offset*not*of the*any**lesser**TRAVEL TIME*thatwill observe to elapse on the*we*internal clock*muon’s**due to**time dilation*. Therefore, the greater the relative speed, the shorter and shorter distances become! *Time dilation*and*distance contraction*are bothphenomena, as far as relative*symmetrical**uniform*motion (i.e., motion in a*straight line*and at a*constant speed*) between any two given observers is concerned, because*each*observer,, has*by the**first postulate**every*right to claim that they are*at rest*and it is the other that is moving.,*HENCE**each*observer will claim that the other’s clocks are ticking more slowly than theirs, while their clocks tick at the*normal*rate of time passage, and*each*observer will claim that the other’s rulers are shorter than theirs, while their rulers are at their*normal*lengths! Therefore, as long as the*relative speed*between objects is greater than zero, that is to say, as long as there is*relative uniform motion*between objects, then the time dilation and distance contraction phenomena will be at work, directly affecting these objects, although, as we’ve seen, these effects become noticeable only at significant fractions of the speed of light.

## Our “Paradox”, Revisited

As we stated earlier, this symmetry appears to be paradoxical, and we may well be inclined to ask, as we did previously when Scotty’s T.O. Special roared through the train crossing where we were standing, “which frame of reference, then, is the ‘correct’ point of view?” Strictly speaking, since the two frames are in relative *uniform* motion with respect to each other, that is, *motion in a straight line and at a constant speed*, then the laws of physics do

*not*‘favour’ one frame over the other. The laws of physics behave

*exactly the same way*

*in either frame*. Therefore, with regard to the space station and the spaceship,

*neither*of the two sets of observers, we nor the astronauts, has the privilege to conclude that, “Yes, we are

*definitely*the ones who are moving!”, and thus, the

*most*that can be said by

*either*party is that, “

*We*and the

*other*frame of reference are in uniform motion relative to each other.” Hence, since we

*are*strictly speaking

*only*about relative uniform motion between reference frames, then we must conclude that

*both*points of view are

*equally*correct! But from this very conclusion arose an

*apparent*logical inconsistency, which was brought to light by several physicists shortly after Einstein published his special

^{[2]}theory of relativity in 1905, in what was coined “The Clock Paradox”, which was later given its more famous name, “The Twin Paradox”. The focus of this argument, as we might have already surmised, was directly on the apparent paradoxical nature of the symmetry of the time dilation phenomenon. However, as we shall discover, the term

*‘apparent’*is quite appropriate, because once we comprehend the

*full*picture,

*no*paradox actually exists! To do so, we must, in our

*later*discussions, take a more detailed look at the distance contraction phenomenon, and then, examine perhaps the strangest, most unexpected, but most

*aesthetic*consequence of the special theory, namely, the

*relativity of simultaneous events*. And so, once again, let’s be prepared to hold on to our false teeth!

## Using The Inverse Of The Time Dilation Factor

On a final note, we can use the *inverse* of the time dilation factor (i.e., the quantity

which is the *inverse* of

to directly calculate corresponding *time intervals*, that is, *time durations*, between two frames of reference that are in relative uniform motion with respect to one another.

For example, if the spaceship zooms past our space station at a relative speed of 0.9798*c*, then *we* will observe that the *astronauts’* clocks are ticking at a rate that is

*slower* than *our* clocks. Therefore, if a time interval of* Δt _{STATION}* elapses on

*our*clocks here on our space station, then

*we*will observe a

*lesser*corresponding time interval of only

elapse on the *astronauts’* clocks. But we take notice of the fact that the value ^{1}/_{5.00} is the *inverse* of the time dilation factor, whose value is 5.00. And if we call the (lesser) corresponding time interval that *we* had observed to elapse on the *astronauts’* clocks *Δt _{ASTROS AS SEEN BY}_{ STATION}*, then clearly, from

*our*point of view, the relationship between these two time intervals is given by the equation

And checking the validity of *{Equation A}* by substituting the value of the relative speed directly into the equation, yields

which is exactly the result we obtained above. But of course, because of the *symmetry* of relativity, from the *astronauts’* point of view, *they* will observe that it is *our* clocks that are ticking 5.00 times slower than *theirs* instead, and hence, from *their* perspective, this relationship between corresponding time intervals *must* be given by the *completely symmetrical* equation

Okay, time for a quick example that will hopefully shed more light on and clear up this last area of our discussion. Let’s say that a second spaceship blazes past our space station again, this time at the hair scorching relative speed of 99.499% of the speed of light, that is, 0.99499*c*. From the *astronauts’* point of view, *they* are at rest, and it is *our space station* that is moving past them at 0.99499*c* instead. On board their *stationary* spaceship, the *astronauts* let 180.0 seconds of *normal* time elapse on *their* clocks.

The question is, then, what corresponding time interval will the *astronauts* observe to have elapsed on *our* clocks on the *moving* space station? Well, from the *astronauts’* perspective, clocks on board the ship must, as pointed out above, be ticking at the *normal* rate of time passage, since the *astronauts* have every right to claim that *they* are the ones at rest, and also, since the *ship’s clocks* are, of course, *stationary* *relative to the* *astronauts*. Consequently, the *astronauts* will observe clocks on our *moving* space station to be ticking at a *slower* rate than *normal*. Now, from *{Equation B}*, we know that

Thus, simply substituting the known quantities into the equation gives us:

Therefore, the *astronauts* will observe a corresponding *lesser* time interval of *only* 18.0 seconds to have elapsed on *our* clocks on the space station!

## “Did You Say ‘In-verse’? Because It Feels Like We’re In ‘Re-verse’!”

Now on the other hand, if *we* observe a time interval of *Δt _{ASTROS AS SEEN BY}_{ STATION}*, elapse on the

*astronauts’*clocks, then

*we*,

*who consider*

*ourselves*(on board our space station) to be

*at rest,*will therefore observe a

*greater*corresponding time interval of

elapse on *our* clocks here on the space station (we are just re-arranging *Equation A*). And substituting *v = *0.9798*c*, from our *original* example, for the relative speed between the spaceship and the space station, we of course obtain the result that

because *we* observe *their* clocks ticking 5.00 times slower than *ours*. But not to be outdone, if the *astronauts* observe a time interval of *Δt _{STATION AS SEEN BY}*

_{ ASTROS}elapse on

*our*clocks, then from the

*astronauts’*perspective, who consider

*themselves*to be

*at rest*, it therefore follows that

(we are just re-arranging *Equation B*), because of relativity’s *symmetry*. And substituting *v = *0.9798*c* once more for the relative speed between our space station and the spaceship, we of course obtain the *completely symmetrical* result that

because the *astronauts* observe *our* clocks ticking 5.00 times slower than *theirs *instead!

Okay, time for one final example – finally. Let’s say that a *third* and final spaceship zooms past the space station, again at the relative speed of 0.99499*c* (where are all of these astronauts going? Is there a poker tourney on Pluto that we aren’t aware of ?…). *We* see their ship fly by, and *we* observe a time interval of 30.0 seconds elapse on *their ship’s* *clocks* before they decide to draw their window blinds and head home to Pluto, so as to take part in the Solar System Series of Texas Hold ‘Em.

Now, the question is, what corresponding time interval will *we* observe to have elapsed on *our* clocks here on the space station? Well, from *our* point of view, *we* are at rest, and it is the *spaceship* that is moving past our space station at 0.99499*c*. Hence, *we* will observe that clocks on board *their* ship are, of course, ticking at a *slower* rate than *normal*, while *our* clocks on the space station will be ticking at the *normal* rate of time passage (since *our* clocks are *stationary*, *relative to us*). And, from re-arranging *{Equation A}*, we know that

So again, simply substituting the known quantities into the equation gives us:

Therefore, *we* will observe a corresponding *greater* time interval of 300.0 seconds to have elapsed on *our* clocks here on the space station! And as a matter for observation, we notice that for *both* of our examples, the *relativistic time dilation factor* has a value of 10. This is because *both examples use the same value of 0.99499c for the relative speed between the two frames of reference!*

## The Finish Line Is In Sight…

Thus, if we carefully analyze these latest calculations and examples, we can conclude that the *inverse* of the time dilation factor is (also) a ratio that can be thought of as having the following meaning:

as seen from the point of view of the *stationary observer*.

Now, looking at our equation, let’s do a little re-naming to make things simpler. Let us call the *“TIME INTERVAL THAT HAS ELAPSED ON THE MOVING CLOCK”* *Δt _{MOVING}*, and the

*corresponding*

*“TIME INTERVAL THAT HAS ELAPSED ON THE STATIONARY CLOCK”*

*Δt*. Hence, our equation for the

_{STATIONARY}*inverse*of the time dilation factor becomes

(from the perspective of the stationary observer), which is much easier to read! But as we know all too well by now, *relative** to an observer*, a moving clock *always ticks more slowly* than a clock that is stationary. Consequently, the amount of time, *Δt _{MOVING}*, that elapses on the moving clock will

*always be less*than the

*corresponding*amount of

*(normal)*time,

*Δt*, that elapses on its stationary counterpart. And because this relation,

_{STATIONARY}is *always* true for two clocks that are in *uniform* motion relative to each other, then the value of the ratio

*must always be less than* * *1, from the viewpoint of the stationary observer. *Therefore*, the value of the quantity

that is, the *inverse* of the time dilation factor, *must also always be less than* 1, from the viewpoint of the *stationary observer*.

## “For The Last Time, Who’s On First?...” Yes, You’re Correct.

But, with all of this “motion – commotion” going on, *who, exactly, is the stationary observer?* Is it

*us?*Is it

*Scotty?*How about those ‘fuzzy’ little

*muons?*Or perhaps it’s the

*astronouts?*Who is it? Indeed, we’ve got a pretty good grip on the crux of

*special relativity,*if we can answer this question without reading any further. Nonetheless, we

*must*answer this question, as it cuts straight to the core of Albert Einstein’s remarkable theory. Hence:

*Since our entire discussion has been strictly concerning*And so, Einstein indeed discovered the

**relative**then by special relativity’s__uniform__motion,**first postulate,**namely, the**principle of relativity,**we (hopefully) now know that:**any and****all**observers can consider their respective reference frames to be**at rest,**that is,**stationary!**We, Scotty, the muons, the astronauts, paramecium, amoebae, big rocks and small rocks –**any and all**observers, provided that they are in**relative uniform motion**– can**assert**that**they are the**and it is__stationary observers__,**the other observers or objects that are moving instead!**Therefore, the equation for the**time dilation and length contraction factor,**along with the equation for the**inverse of the time dilation factor,**must apply from the viewpoints of**any and all**observers in**relative uniform motion!**And as a direct result of this fact,**everyone**will claim that they possess the**fastest****ticking**clocks and the**longest**measuring rulers in the universe!*truth*that, as far as relative uniform motion is concerned,

*all observers are created equal! Tally – ho!!*

We close our current discourse with a quote from Einstein himself, from the book *“The Evolution of Physics” (1938)*, which he co-authoured with L. Infeld, that summarizes our findings quite nicely.

*“In classical [Newtonian] physics it was always assumed that clocks in motion and at rest have the same rhythm, that rods in motion and at rest have the same length. If the velocity of light is the same in all coordinate systems, if the [principle of] relativity… is valid, then we must sacrifice this assumption. It is difficult to get rid of deep-rooted prejudices, but there is no other way.”*

## Notes:

[2] The reason for the word *“special”* in the *special theory of relativity* is that the theory is an analysis of the effects of only a certain type of motion, specifically, *uniform motion* – motion *in a straight line and at a constant speed*. But there is also *accelerated* motion, in which the speed changes its direction and/or magnitude over time, such as the motion that we* feel* when our muscle car takes a tight corner, or as it accelerates from zero to sixty on the drag strip. In 1916, Albert Einstein published his masterpiece, the *general theory of relativity*. It encompassed accelerated motion and subsumed *special relativity*, but very much more, it was a radical new theory about the inner workings of the *gravitational force*, which, until then, had no *“how gravity actually works”* manual. It was Einstein’s insight that one *cannot* distinguish the effects of accelerated motion from those of a gravitational field – which he would later call the “happiest thought” of his life – that showed him what his end result must be. For instance, if we were in a windowless elevator somewhere out in deep space where gravity was *absent*, and if the elevator was *accelerating* “upward” at the *constant* rate of ** one g**, then the effects that we would experience in the elevator would be

*indistinguishable*from the effects that we would experience standing on the surface of the earth, where gravity is

*present*. We would feel the floor of the elevator pressing up against our feet, just as the surface of the earth presses up against our feet. If we were to let go of an object, say a billiard ball, it would ‘fall’ to the floor of the elevator with increasing speed, in

*exactly*the same way that an object dropped from a height would fall to the surface of the earth with increasing speed. According to Einstein, the effects of accelerated motion are

*equivalent*to those of gravity. Now, applying

*special relativity’s*time dilation and distance contraction phenomena to analyze the effects that accelerated motion has on space and time, he discovered that, from the point of view of the accelerating observer, accelerated motion bends space itself, and warps time itself. Furthermore, a greater acceleration produces a greater bending and warping, or “curvature”, of “space-time”. Hence, with this analysis, Einstein was able to make the final brilliant and intrepid link in his logic, asserting that since accelerated motion and gravity are equivalent, and since acceleration curves space-time,

*then gravity*. It took him ten years of intense, and at times tormented thinking to mathematically achieve this end result. According to the general theory of relativity, then, gravity is

**itself**must also be the curvature of space-time*not*some mysterious,

*instantaneous*attractive force between objects, but rather, gravity

**the curvature of space and the warping of time caused by an object’s presence, whose influence is propagated at**

*is**exactly the speed of light*. And it is this curving of space-time by the presence of mass that causes the “attractive” force between all objects, with a greater mass, just as with a greater acceleration, producing a greater curvature of space-time, thus producing a greater “attractive” force. Hence, our earth is following a path in the curved space-time created by the sun, as it orbits. And the moon is, in turn, following a path in the curved space-time created by the earth, as it orbits us. To aid with the ‘visualization’ of this curvature, physicists often use the analogy of a heavy bowling ball that is placed at the centre of a stretched – out, flat rubber sheet, with the sheet itself representing

*space*. The presence of the ball warps the surface of the sheet, creating a curvature that is greatest nearest the ball, which then becomes less and less as the distance from the ball increases. Now, if a small marble is rolling in the vicinity of the heavy bowling ball, then it will

*follow*the curved path created by the ball and

*‘orbit’*the bowling ball. However, this is an extremely simple analogy at best, because to begin with, Einstein first had to deal with

*how*the presence of mass curves our three dimensional space

*and*warps the passage of time, and then, as if that were not enough, he had to deal with

*what*the combined effect of this curvature of three dimensional space and this warping of time

*has on the motion of material bodies! His theory has correctly predicted the motion of objects in our vast universe (and the trajectory of light itself!) where Newton’s theory of gravity has failed, as once more, Newtonian gravity is only accurate when dealing with objects of comparatively small mass, which are traveling at relative speeds much less than the speed of light. The true essence of Einstein’s genius lies is the fact that there was*

*absolutely no*experimental evidence that existed, at the time, that he could use to guide him in formulating the general theory, although he knew that

*for very small (i.e., everyday) relative speeds*, the general theory’s equations had to transform into Newton’s equations of gravity and motion

*as a limiting case*. Hence, having only

*his*single elegant premise – that one

*cannot*distinguish the effects of accelerated motion from those of a gravitational field – and his special theory to build upon, he created the general theory using pure thought and reason alone! Einstein’s

*general theory of relativity*continues to be

*the*theory of gravitation in use to this day, passing

*all*rigorous tests that have been thrown its way. It is one of the two fundamental pillars of modern physics (the other being quantum mechanics, for which Einstein also helped to lay the foundation!), and is considered by many to be the greatest individual intellectual achievement of all time.

## Continue To "The Lorentz Contraction, or, How Motion Affects Space (Part 1)"

- The Lorentz Contraction, or, How Motion Affects Space (Part 1)

The 2nd in a series of articles on Albert Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity

## Go Back To Part 3

- Does Motion Affect The Speed At Which Time Passes? (Part 3)

The 1st in a series of articles on Albert Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity

## A Poll: Was This Hub Understandable?

### Did this hub summarize Parts 1 to 3 clearly?

## Another Poll: Was This Hub Enjoyable To Read?

### Did you enjoy reading this hub?

## Comments

No comments yet.