Yahoo 知識+ 將於 2021 年 5 月 4 日 (美國東岸時間) 停止服務,而 Yahoo 知識+ 網站現已轉為僅限瀏覽模式。其他 Yahoo 資產或服務,或你的 Yahoo 帳戶將不會有任何變更。你可以在此服務中心網頁進一步了解 Yahoo 知識+ 停止服務的事宜,以及了解如何下載你的資料。

Al P
Lv 7
Al P 發問於 Science & MathematicsPhysics · 9 年前

How might Dr.Feynman intuitively explain time dilation?

How might the great Dr.Feynman explain proper time dilation of a

macroscopic object during a (real) round trip where it lands on

a hypothetical planet orbiting Proxima Centauri (4LY) and then returns

to earth in the most intuitive (simple) way? I'm asking on behalf of

a contact.

Respectfully, do not answer using arguments like

"space-time rotation matrices", "twin paradox", and

the like unless if is flat-out intuitive. I can envision

how he might do this. If said explanation exists, please

include it. As best I can tell, he always had a beautiful

simple way of explaining things like this.

更新:

Koshka, thank you for your answer. I really like it.

The other parts of the universe did not allow Steve's

family to physically go into the future (much) in my thought

experiment. So, time really did advance at a slow rate for them,

and, theoretically they still could have accumulated real time knowledge

in their thermodynamic states. The same physics that applied to them

could have been applied to Steve. You see, the universe itself had decided

to change the rate at which time (and knowledge) advanced for the family.

There is really no paradox.

I think my current question is much more interesting, and the fact

that Scythain says, "That's never been done either.", really

gives me pause. Again, I'm considering a real time-like trip using

macroscopic objects.

更新 2:

I looks like Scythian scared off all takers ;)

Here is the answer to my themodynaimc-relativistic

coffee-bean paradox that didn't garner much interest

while I wait a little longer.

The answer to the question simply put is:

Steve any his family fall asleep as a result of

some ponderable futhuristic themodynaimc effects.

Let's call them cryonics. Steve is sent off (asleep)

on his relativitic trip. Latter the ENTIRE family

wakes up from their themodynaimic sleep, finishes

eating there breakfast, walks out the door, and

realizes 8 years have passed on earth. Or if Steve

had never entered into cryogenic sleep, there would

be some confusion between him and his family. No big

deal, the laws of physics are invaiant under coordinate

transformation we think.

Interesting mix of relativity and themodynaimics?

I'll let you decide, but I thought other's might have some

fun solving what I considered to be an engineering puzzle;

no FTL and no instantaneous starts and stops a

更新 3:

llowed!

更新 4:

I want some brave takers of my current question right now! ;)

This is really interesting, at least to me.

@koshka, I quote myself (above):

"theoretically they still could have accumulated real time knowledge

in their thermodynamic states" You see, words like sleeping, frozen,

etc. get us into trouble. I was trying to generalize.

更新 5:

They could have been aware of events mentally and even in an animate way and

still not "aged". I thinks it's more interesting to "awaken" in the future

without prior knowledge of events. Remember, I pointed out Steve

could (or not) have also take part in "cryonics" during his trip. Real time is the

only criteria events or not.

更新 6:

Hello my friend. Thank you for your interest in my other answer.

WE, cannot do any of this NOW so there

is nothing to AGREE or DISAGREE about. Yes? Think

future. This a thought experiment. Yes? The human

brain has not been proven to RETAIN knowledge must less

RECEIVE R.T.K using using current technology yet, YES?

更新 7:

In my T.E. "the family" remains in a closed system relative

to the rest of the universe, but information "MAY" still pass

in and out of said system. Yes, entropy of the universe will

indeed increase, and I'm now going to throw you another curve:

Consider ONE more (notice that word ONE) extreme version OF MY

更新 8:

T.E. There is another chunck of universe I will again call the family.

It is protected from heat death compliments of its dying external

universe; the family's "microstates and knowledge are somehow conserved".

Indeed, in this ONE T.E. the universe may expand and/or contract

更新 9:

many times, but, by some ponderable physical means, much knowledge

(not all) is held in trust by the family. In the future, if human

entities cannot handle this then silicon based entities, for example,

containing your mind, feelings, and accumulating knowledge might.

更新 10:

There is no right or wrong answer. Theoretically, the laws of

physics do not bar any of this. So ideas like past-present-future

have no meaning. This "machine" keeps repairing itself without

end. I hinted in the other question there are many many scenarios.

So barring crazy answers, there is no right or wrong answer.

If this goes on we'll have PDF files up the ying yang :)

4 個解答

相關度
  • 9 年前
    最愛解答

    As far as I know, Richard Feynman never really had a "beautiful, simple" way of explaining the Twin Paradox. I don't know if anybody ever has, because that would be providing a "flat out intuitive" explanation of special relativity. That's never been done either. The mathematics may be elementary, but the mind-bending consequences of it defies both intuition and common sense.

    I would LOVE to see others offer "elegant Richard Feynman" explanations of special relativity, time dilation, and the Twin Paradox. Go for it, people!

  • DaveWH
    Lv 7
    9 年前

    I have Richard Feyman's famous 'Lectures on Physics' texts, and I often found his explanations rather difficult to follow!!

    I'll try and give you an explanation, but its not easy!. The whole theory of Special Relativity is based around one premise, that the velocity of light is the same in ALL reference frames. Why? Well, for that, you have to look at Maxwell's field equations [ indeed, Einstein had to make sure that Special Relativity did not contradict these equations!]. Within these equations, there is a constant term that crops up when you go through the process of deducing the wave nature of electromagnetic radiation [ a standard exercise for undergraduates]. The term is

    1 / √ (μo εo)

    Now, μo, the permeability of free space and εo, the permittivity of free space, are the same, as far as we know, all over the universe. This term IS the velocity of light, c. So, you can see that the velocity of light depends ONLY on these two constants. The velocity of light is the ONLY velocity that is NOT RELATIVE TO ANYTHING ELSE!!. It is governed only by these two constants. So, it doesn't matter what your frame of reference is, these two constants are the same. If you were in a spaceship travelling at 90% of the speed of light, these constants are the same INSIDE YOUR SHIP as outside. So the velocity of light MUST be the same inside and outside your ship. BUT, in order for it to be MEASURED as being the same, THE METER RULES AND CLOCKS YOU USE MUST CHANGE. Your meter rule MUST be shorter that those on earth and your clocks MUST run more slowly than those on earth otherwise you would measure a DIFFERENT VALUE OF c than that on earth, which is not allowed. So your on-board clocks MUST run more slowly. But its not just the clocks, its time itself. All of the electrochemical processes in your body slow down too. Hence, you age more slowly and that's what leads to the twin paradox.

  • 9 年前

    Time dilation is tricky.

    Take the example of two ships passing at high speed.

    Each ship will feel at rest and assume the other ship is moving fast.

    Time on the other ship is slowed by your view. You assume your time is fast from his perspective

    BUT people in the other ship think your time is SLOWED.

    When you slow the difference in speeds things magically sort themselves out.

    It is during the accelerations and decelerations that fixes things.

  • Koshka
    Lv 5
    9 年前

    Yes? yes.

    Zap!

    資料來源: Information seems to have passed outside of 'isolated' system (chunks/rimshot/cough-cough-spit hairball) after all, as your replies NOW seem to indicate some adiabatic access to it (the now 'zapped' past). The traces (bits of information) you left points to evidence that a conversation about a thought experiment on possible 'time warps' did occur. The only way to retrieve it (the past) would be IF it was C&P, printed or downloaded, whuch is most likely improprable. It was fun to give you a hard time and 'your contact' would have enjoyed giving Feynman a hard time, too. He might have explained and chances are he would say: 'If you don't like it, go somewhere else' =)
還有問題嗎?立即提問即可得到解答。