A Paradox in Time Dilation

[motopilot322]

I watched this again just to be sure..and yes..you're wrong..

[motopilot322]

Wasted time man..I don't see the problem..they'll both see what they need to see to keep s=d/t true..done deal..thats that. It's not a paradox..it's a rule

[redmistpete]

I experienced time dilation watching this video- gimme my 8 minutes back, retard!

[EdgeUHF]

this sucks, this video is about perception of sizes..where i don't like this video is the car is actually just one size when it fits in the garage, i was actually looking for something of substance. This has nothing to do with time. this whole thing is just epic fail -1

[EvoPortal]

This has NOTHING to do with time dilation. Its called length contraction. Idiots...

[groundzerobuild]

he is a latino!

[RevengeOfTheAbyss]

The problem is that there is a THIRD reference point - the human BRAIN. We cannot grasp true time and relativity, because the clock-speeds of our minds are relativley the same. Time is INFINITLEY divisible, however, the brain is a function in time, and it has a frequency that creates various "slices" that we call the present moment, that we call "hours minutes seconds" and that is inextricably linked to the universe that we exist in.

[RevengeOfTheAbyss]

@RevengeOfTheAbyss If there are beings that exist "between" the wavelengths of our own, then they would be invisible to us as a matter of wave-synchronicity.

[RevengeOfTheAbyss]

@RevengeOfTheAbyss The world that we see is mostly a product of our own eyes, although it is real, some parts that we see are representations of, but not the actual state of each object, as each object has multiple states, and each awareness has certain fixed states of perception that create thier "worlds" that they live in. Reality is not as tangible as we once thought, there is a lot of empty space - fill it with your imagination, otherwise it stays dark.

[52soccerstar]

@RevengeOfTheAbyss you hore

[depth386]

fail video

[PICLex]

AMAZING Thanks. Need mo

[Ironjagg]

add subtitles.. cant hearrrrrrr harro harroo

[GoblinXXX]

@Ironjagg "Ricky Ricardo explains Special Relativity". (Next up, Charo explains String Theory.)

[badger5508]

This guy is my PHYS-mechanics prof for this semester. Serious but cool guy.

[SuperMagnetizer]

Optical illusion. Nothing more.

[usefulmusic]

If two objects are in relative motion, which one travels faster than the other?

[SuperMagnetizer]

Hi usefulmusic,

The question can only be answered by reference to a "stationary" frame of reference. Two race cars in relative motion have absolute faster/slower speeds relative to the Earth, but only relative speeds with respect to the other car.

[usefulmusic]

Thanks for replying, but... As I understand it, in both Galileo's and Einstein's (Special) theory no frame of reference can be considered privileged, or absolute. Therefore, if you consider race car A's Frame as stationary, race car B is heavier than A. Reverse your stationary F of R and A is now heavier than B. Therefore, A and B are both heavier than each other. Strange.

[SuperMagnetizer]

Well, the speed of a racecar is measured relative to the ground. All observers intuitively and sensibly agree on this. The ground is taken as the "absolute" reference. And only in special relativity do objects ostensibly gain mass near the speed of light. These are all optical illusions.

In the above example, does the car get shorter, or does the garage get shorter? The sensible and correct answer is that neither one gets shorter, although each may appear optically shifted & shrunken.

[tml4873]

@SuperMagnetizer You are absolutely wrong. Changes in mass and size due to velocity are NOT optical illusions. They are REAL. In the example, BOTH get shorter, and longer, depending on the position of the observer. Again, this is not an illusion of any kind. Please review the two theories of relativity again if you are going to respond.

[HalfEatenDimSim]

@tml4873 I spit in your face

[gokul1991]

sorry i cant hear your voice properly ":s

[dougfwalters]

THATS MY TEACHER!!!

[th3planetsghost]

I volunteer to be accelerated to extreme speeds around the planet to see if I travel into the future. will stay up there for years at high gs! lets do it!

[ej1elliot]

And you'd disintegrate at that speed..

[frankiedetergent]

lets put acceleration aside the acceleration. earl and anna are in 2 spaceships, earls goes from eath to andromeda, and anna comes from andromeda to earth. what then?i don't get it. from earls's point,he is staying, anna is traveling, so shes not getting older. And vice-versa from anna's point. The way i can explain it is by paralell universes :))). Earl will see anna young, and live on like that, anna being young and alive :)). and anna sees earl young and lives like that.U big iq guys, pls hlp

[mcsleeachuck]

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, light speed is a constant for any object, no matter it's speed (less than speed of light) and direction in relation to the light. As a person travels faster time essentially slows for them, though they are not aware of it. Type in "Einstein's big idea (Theory of Relativity)" in youtube and click on the first video on the list

[frankiedetergent]

so i think i've overcomplicated it. by looking at that video i understand that, in my situation (both anna&earl starting&traveling towards each other), both earl and anna will have longer lives. I was thinking that u in ur traveling spaceship, feel like standing still, and everything else feels moving (so they will have time dilatation, not u).

[mcsleeachuck]

If earl and anna travel in opposite directions at the same speed, then they experience time at the same rate. It's as if they're living in slow motion, while everyone around them is living in a fast forward reality. So if earl and anna are 20 years old, and travel at speed of light for one year, they will both be 21 years old no matter what direction they headed in relation to one another.

[frankiedetergent]

it can't be that easy :p. who is to say that they (earl&anna traveling in spaceships) are moving?someone who is standing still. but if u(the observer) where with anna, from ur point of view, u2 are standing still, everything else is moving so they will shrink&time-dilatate. from 2 points of view, there are different realities that they experience, i'll stick to parallel&infinite universes :))

[gulgul333]

mate if you post scientific videos for others to watch and learn something make sure that you present everything the way average joe can understand that.this is the worst clip i've seen.besides looks like you don't understand this paradox yourself,bollocks...

[ispaniola]

NO COMPRENDRE!

too bad..

[lorialyse83]

SOUND QUALITY SUCKS!!!!!!!! I can't even understand what he is saying!!!!! DAMMIT!!!!!

[groundzerobuild]

@lorialyse83 sound is inversely proportional to the race of the speaker !

[kciNJNadon]

I think you're repeating something you heard before and don't really know wtf you are saying.

[humbertojimmy]

Perhaps YOU didn't understand it and, somehow, feel the need to express your ignorance in the form of an attack on others you can...

Think about it, breath and get over it.

[kciNJNadon]

Perhaps you should shut up and sit down. I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to the instructor in the video.

[humbertojimmy]

Then how did i got your comment has a reply?? Anyway, if you spoke towards the author, yes, i also believe he sounds weird.

[humbertojimmy]

This paradox forgets an essential part of the equation. Time doesn't exist alone, it exists combined with space, both are one. If the car is travelling at a speed that allows him to skip certain fragments of time, there's no garantee that it needs to make a stop at the garage during its path, at all. In a word: If time is relative, so it's space. The speed of matter is the key to define just how much time/space is skipped, saving up existence for the car.

[Lyinxz]

I can barely hear what and understand what your saying.. you should put subtitles on

[MarxistKnight]

I actually thought of a similar problem to what they demonstrate here with the "car and garage paradox" myself, but I was thinking more with time dilation. The whole point of relativity is (among other things) that time would pass slower for a moving object, as demonstrated by the experiment on an aircraft. But if you were on the plane, you would say that the Earth was moving not you, and therefore the ground clocks should be running slow.. it doesn't make sense!

[Rudy01010]

You are forggeting the force.

[jimixcore]

"That's because your thinking 3rd dimensional. If you believe there is only 3 dimensions then gravity does not make any sense either."

LOL! I must say, that was a great come-back.

[bob1qaz]

come-back? Sorry I thought I was talking to an intellectual.

[jimixcore]

There aren't intellectual "come-backs" in arguments?

[bob1qaz]

Hey jimmy, whatever happened to you? In high school you said you were going to become a Dr. Then we heard you got locked up for sexually molesting a little boy. Well we're glad you finally got out of prison. Dont give up on your future. We're rooting for you.

[ACC1987STAR]

"The sun is the same in a relative way that you're older...." - Pink Floyd

"There was a young lady named Bright, whose speed was far faster than light; she set out one day in a relative way, and returned on the previous night" - from "About Time" by Paul Davies

[54spiritedwill54]

Altough this is a generaly acepted theory there is a falecy on the argument.

[pocoapoco2]

I don't see that acceleration breaks the symetry. Unless there really is a stationary frame of reference which would seem to be provided by mass. I mean what if there are two people each on a different planet and the planets are moving away from each other at great speed. How then would you resolve time? You could send a space ship between the two planets, at some point it would come to rest with respect to the planet it was going to making the same time as that planet but different on the other

[REZJT]

yea, i am pretty sure one would need a third observer to more accurately calculate the time it takes light to get from Point A to B as well as from A and/or B to get to C.

( C = third POV observer and A&B are the High Velocity planets POVs) Or i would think that would the best and most precise method. *Note: astronomers use light spectroscopy to measure the red shift in the light spectrum to somehow measure the direction and *speed or velocity, i think** ~but i am not sure how accurate it is.

[bob1qaz]

You can't you have to have 2 different times, just like on earth we has eastern and standard time for different parts of earth. You would have a coversion chart for the different planets times just as we do for living in japan or new york.

[Robster881]

It's not that, it is a different time, it's that time would be moving at a different speed, so you would not be able to convert interplanetary times

[bob1qaz]

Yes you can, you can't just add or subtract though you have to follow an equation, such as 1 second on earth is 2.63 seconds on another planet. Kind of like converting C to F it does not really make much sense when you visualize it.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

1 second on earth is 2.63 on another planet?

That is ridiculous. The other planet would have to be moving impossibly fast to achieve a time conversion like that.

Is that what you mean, or did you have something else in mind?

[bob1qaz]

No it's not ridiculous the planet would have to be in another solar system.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

??? That makes no sense whatsoever.

[bob1qaz]

That's because your thinking 3rd dimensional. If you believe there is only 3 dimensions then gravity does not make any sense either.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

no no no...

I am very well versed in the idea of multiple dimensions outside our 3 spatial dimensions, including time, hypothetical dimensions, and spatial dimensions.

I was just saying that it is very unlikely that 1 second on earth would be 2.63 seconds on another planet.

[bob1qaz]

Look up time dilation not only is it a scientific theory but a law of nature. It really happens. Look it up.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

I realize that. I was saying that it would be highly unlikely that our planet's measure of a second would equal 2.63 seconds of measured time on another. The planet would have to be moving incredibly fast, relative to our own.

[bob1qaz]

But the chance that it does not exist is impossible. Out galaxy is one of trillions of trillions and our universe is one of googleplexes of other universes. The chances of there NOT being another planet moving that fast is impossible, your not looking at it in the right perspective the whole universe would be moving relativly faster. We are trapped in our constantly moving.galaxy/universe.

[Rubiksfanatic1]

the thing is...

THAT PLANET WOULD HAVE TO BE MOVING INCREDIBLY FAST. SO FAST IT'S MIND BOGGLING. It would have to be close to light speed.

Which is the point of my, well, argument, so to speak. I don't even know why this has escalated so far. To give space to others I shall shut up on the matter henceforth.

[bob1qaz]

You believe our universe (collection of solar systems) is moving at the same speed as other universes?

[MasterGhostKnight]

Altough this is a generaly acepted theory there is a falecy on the argument.

[xXShmotzXx]

According to Einstein Time slows down when you move at high speeds.

[itsanthonyhere]

thanks

[Kamp3rz]

wow reli...lol...mabe u should have read the "time dilation" part.

[Glf453]

hahahahahahaha

[adamchilton]

No it doesn't you're time is exactly the same always, it is a stationary observer who believes that you time has slowed. You sense no change. Your watch still ticks exactly as it has always, your heart still beats in the same manner, but with someone watching you it appears that you watch and heart have slowed.

[tennismike22]

time is a measurement.

is that a correct statement?