last day (15 days later) » 

Feeds
Feeds
05:57
-3
Q: Why does everyone seem to think that moving clock appear to tick slower?

Katz389Im getting interested in special relativity and almost all people and explanations about the subject i found on internet seem to think that when A and B would be in relative motion, they would both observe the other's clock tick slower than their own. However what I found about this is following:...

special-relativity reference-frames time
G. Smith
G. Smith
the clock moved from A to B lags behind Why do you think “lags behind” means it has ticked faster?
You might want to read about muons and time dilation.
Katz389
Katz389
@G. Smith Where did i say it ticks faster? The moved clock ticked slower of course. That logically means that observer on train watches the outside clock tick faster.
mike stone
mike stone
Why "logically" must the outside clock appear to tick faster? It does not. You confuse "logic" with Newtonian thinking about time.
G. Smith
G. Smith
You seem to think that one of them is “really moving” and one is “really at rest”. The world doesn’t work that way.
m4r35n357
m4r35n357
Lagging/leading and ticking faster/slower are not the same thing!
Katz389
Katz389
05:57
@mike stone Did you read the quotation? Your watch has gone SLOWER, if you spend an hour inside a train and at the end of the trip the outside clock says it was 10 years what do you think you see on the clocks lined up beside the railroad? Do they move slow or fast?
G. Smith
G. Smith
Regarding your two questions, the answer is No to both.
Katz389
Katz389
@m4r35n357 Are you implying somehow that the outside clock would appear slower to traveller and then at the end the last clock would suddenly jump forward together with the state of the outside world? Thats not even close to believable
my2cts
my2cts
So the whole physics world including the author misunderstands the paper since 1905 and this is very easy to see. This combination of statements by itself makes it extremely unlikely or impossible that you are right. Even though physicists like all humans are social apes they would not be so collectively stupid. Where did you find the confidence to nevertheless make such statements?
Katz389
Katz389
@my2cts Im not saying everyone's wrong. I quoted Einstein so your statement that i contradict him is contradiction in itself. However of those who say the clock is always slower and the perceived dilation is symmetrical in uniform motion nobody provided any citation of Einstein on this. So where do you find the confidence to tackle a well formed and based question with some personal comments about my confidence?
my2cts
my2cts
You can quote Einstein and contradict him. By the way I did not say you contradict Einstein. I just asked how, when you draw a very simple conclusion from it "complete opposite to what everyone seems to think", this does this not make you doubt yourself. Then you ask the very same people if the conclusion is correct. If course they and me will say you are wrong. Don't do this, just read on and feel free to ask real questions. Or come with solid proof.
Katz389
Katz389
05:57
@my2cts Look, I dont think everyone is wrong. Im pretty sure there is a lot of guys out there who know how this works, but there is like 100x times more guys who got it wrong but feel the need to go and comment around quick answers without any logic behind them, or write some off topic remarks about confidence.
Alfred Centauri
Alfred Centauri
Welcome New contributor Katz389! I've flagged your question for moderator attention. Something doesn't seem quite right here. (1) Symmetric time dilation due to uniform relative motion is an unambiguous prediction of SR (2) You seem to be suggesting that this isn't logical, i.e., you seem to be suggesting that SR is logically inconsistent (3) SR isn't logically inconsistent. I'm concerned that you're looking for a debate (or argument) rather than an answer. Are you trolling PSE?
Wolphram jonny
Wolphram jonny
@AlfredCentauri he is not trolling, he is confused but totally sure he is right. Be supportive, do not become the troll.
Alfred Centauri
Alfred Centauri
@Wolphramjonny, only the OP has the standing to answer my question, and I do welcome a response from Katz389.
Aaron Stevens
Aaron Stevens
...after stopping the traveler has physically aged less than the rest of the world. Keep in mind that once the traveler comes to rest relative to the world the he has changed inertial reference frames where the world has not. The situations are no longer symmetric.
 
3 hours later…
Katz389
Katz389
08:47
@AaronStevens I dont understand why you try to introduce new complications into the situation. The quote says nothing about about reference frames, nothing abou stopping. The train does not have to stop for this effect to occur. The train can go from A to B to C and in each the outside clock will be more and more foward. Ergo the outside time and motion must be moving faster for him.
m4r35n357
m4r35n357
@Katz389 No, I'm just saying that a faster clock can lag, and a slower clock can lead. In the OP the two ideas (absolute clock reading vs rate of ticking) are totally intermingled, which is one of the obstacles to understanding SR.
Katz389
Katz389
@AlfredCentauri I just want to know how and from where the idea that moving clock look always slower comes from.
@m4r35n357 Im sorry but i feel this is instinctively wrong. I will ask you the same thing i asked others: what if the outside clocks are sun clocks and you enter the train on 12:00 and leave it on 18:00, while only a minute went by for you. Do you expect the sun to not move and then teleport to its 18:00 position, or do you expect it to move really fast but the sun-clock shadow not ?
 
3 hours later…
m4r35n357
m4r35n357
12:23
@Katz389 Very sorry but I'm afraid I'm going to have to give up at this point. I am not convinced that you understand your own question, and are continuing to build your mental model on incorrect assumptions.
Katz389
Katz389
The question is very simple: Why should the stationary clock seem slower to the traveller, when the quote i provided explicitly says that his own clock will have slower. Please note that A and B can be arbitrarily close and there can be an infinite amount of such points
 
11 hours later…
Alfred Centauri
Alfred Centauri
23:01
@Katz389 Honestly, I don't buy that. I don't think you're being completely honest with me. Time dilation due to uniform relative motion is a straightforward result from the Lorentz transformations so I think you know where the idea came from. I think you also know that the thought experiment is not an example of uniform relative motion since clock A changes reference frames. I think you probably know that this must have an effect that should be taken into account.

last day (15 days later) »