Question about Apollo 11
21 February 2010, 10:37 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Question about Apollo 11
I watched a program recently about space and all that. There is a theory that If you were to fly away from the earth at the speed of light for about a minute, then fly back at the same speed, Due to relativity you would have experienced 2 minutes of time, but on your return to earth, a MUCH higher amount of time would have passed. Something like 25000 years of something.
My question is, How much time passed on Apollo 11 whilst in transit to the moon, compared to how much time passed on earth?
Does the theory as mentioned above only work if you are traveling at the speed of light, or does it stay relative to your speed of travel through space?
I guess this is what is called space-time continuum ?
I also recall something else about bending space-time..?
A bit deep for a Sunday night, especially when I'm hungover, ill (terrible case of manflu) and tired.
Oh, no mumbo jumbo about moon landing not happening because I'm not interested in that
My question is, How much time passed on Apollo 11 whilst in transit to the moon, compared to how much time passed on earth?
Does the theory as mentioned above only work if you are traveling at the speed of light, or does it stay relative to your speed of travel through space?
I guess this is what is called space-time continuum ?
I also recall something else about bending space-time..?
A bit deep for a Sunday night, especially when I'm hungover, ill (terrible case of manflu) and tired.
Oh, no mumbo jumbo about moon landing not happening because I'm not interested in that
21 February 2010, 11:13 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2010, 11:15 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bushey
Posts: 2,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know how much time would pass, but it has been proved that the faster you travel the slower time becomes. An experiment was conducted in which two atomic clocks were synchronised and then one flown around the world. When they compared the clocks the one that had flown round the world was fractionally behind the one that stayed put.
21 February 2010, 11:16 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
21 February 2010, 11:16 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Bristol-ish
Posts: 2,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time is affected by speed, but it's all about relativity.
If you were in a space ship, the faster you travel to the speed of light, the slower time would appear to go to the word that you saw out of the window. However, inside the capsual, time would appear to be carrying on at the normal rate.
The same is true for anyone who sees you in your spaceship - if they could see a clock on the wall of your spaceship, it would appear to be running slower than their own, stationary clock. Two of your minutes in the spaceship, therefore, would appear to be a very long time to the stationary observer.
I can't remember all the physics, but basically, time appears to travel slower to the observer, the faster the object travels. I seem to remember a B52 flew around the world with an atomic clock in the 1960's. It had been synchronised with a static clock before taking off, but when the B52 returned, its clock was slower by a fraction of a second.
Odd.
The speed Apollo 11 went, I doubt they would have noticed any difference.
If you were in a space ship, the faster you travel to the speed of light, the slower time would appear to go to the word that you saw out of the window. However, inside the capsual, time would appear to be carrying on at the normal rate.
The same is true for anyone who sees you in your spaceship - if they could see a clock on the wall of your spaceship, it would appear to be running slower than their own, stationary clock. Two of your minutes in the spaceship, therefore, would appear to be a very long time to the stationary observer.
I can't remember all the physics, but basically, time appears to travel slower to the observer, the faster the object travels. I seem to remember a B52 flew around the world with an atomic clock in the 1960's. It had been synchronised with a static clock before taking off, but when the B52 returned, its clock was slower by a fraction of a second.
Odd.
The speed Apollo 11 went, I doubt they would have noticed any difference.
21 February 2010, 11:29 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting. Thanks for your replies.
So you could essentially go forward in time if we had the technology to get to the speeds required to make a difference.
I'm not going to be able to sleep now :Lol1:
So you could essentially go forward in time if we had the technology to get to the speeds required to make a difference.
I'm not going to be able to sleep now :Lol1:
Trending Topics
21 February 2010, 11:34 PM
#8
Your time (as seen by a stationary observer) slows down by a factor of (1 - v^2/c^2) where v is your velocity relative to the observer and c is the speed of light. If you managed to travel at the speed of sound your time would appear to stop to stationary observers. It's impossible to travel at the speed of light because your mass increases by the reciprocal of this factor, so as you approach the speed of light your mass increases to infinity.
22 February 2010, 09:39 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Preston, Lancs.
Posts: 2,977
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Relativity: A Matter of Overtime - TIME
22 February 2010, 09:55 AM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Zed Ess Won Hay Tee
Posts: 21,611
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
22 February 2010, 10:54 AM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very interesting and hard to get hold of.
They say that the faster you go, the slower time passes in your own piece of space and that the astronauts landed a little bit younger than when they first set off! Not by much I imagine and I can't tell you the amount involved.
The whole business of space, the Universe, time,gravity, and speed is very involved of course. I sometimes wonder if scientific calculations about the arrival of space ships at their destinations or return etc is affected by this too.
I still cannot get over the vastness of space and the billions of years and distances involved, a lot more to it than meets the eye!
Les
They say that the faster you go, the slower time passes in your own piece of space and that the astronauts landed a little bit younger than when they first set off! Not by much I imagine and I can't tell you the amount involved.
The whole business of space, the Universe, time,gravity, and speed is very involved of course. I sometimes wonder if scientific calculations about the arrival of space ships at their destinations or return etc is affected by this too.
I still cannot get over the vastness of space and the billions of years and distances involved, a lot more to it than meets the eye!
Les
22 February 2010, 11:12 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a question.
If it's impossible to travel at the speed of light due to mass increasing to infinity, why don't photons have an infinite mass?
If it's impossible to travel at the speed of light due to mass increasing to infinity, why don't photons have an infinite mass?
22 February 2010, 12:52 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes that is how I remember it from school days Daz, it is a particle of electromagnetic energy without mass. I also think that an item cannot reach the speed of light if it possesses any mass.
Les
Les
22 February 2010, 01:06 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all clear now 
Massless particles are known to experience the same gravitational acceleration as other particles (which provides empirical evidence for the equivalence principle) because they do have relativistic mass, which is what acts as the gravity charge. Thus, perpendicular components of forces acting on massless particles simply change their direction of motion, the angle change in radians being GM/rc2 with gravitational lensing, a result predicted by general relativity. The component of force parallel to the motion still affects the particle, but by changing the frequency rather than the speed. This is because the momentum of a massless particle depends only on frequency and direction (compare with the momentum of low speed massive objects, which depends on mass, speed, and direction). Massless particles move in straight lines in spacetime, called geodesics, and gravitational lensing relies on spacetime curvature. Gluon-gluon interaction is a little different: they exert forces on each other but, because the acceleration is parallel to the line connecting them (albeit not at simultaneous moments), the acceleration will be zero unless the gluons move in a direction perpendicular to the line connecting them (so that velocity is perpendicular to acceleration).
22 February 2010, 01:07 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Bristol-ish
Posts: 2,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think one of the things about space / time is that it is inexorably linked to the speed of light, which has some unusual properties - the main one being that the speed of light is constant. That means, even if you're travelling at the speed of light, and someone approaches you head-on at the speed of light, you only see them travelling at the speed of light.
This is different to, say, travelling in a car at 30mph with an approaching car travelling at 30mph, since you would see them approaching at 60mph.
22 February 2010, 01:33 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scud8
If you managed to travel at the speed of sound your time would appear to stop to stationary observers.
Don't forget that the earth is moving through space at 30000m/s (67000mph). Mars only moves at 14000mph, so Martian colonists would have a different time reference from earth.
22 February 2010, 05:05 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One that always gets me when looking into the sky at night, is looking at a star, not any one in particular and then thinking what I am looking at might not even exist anymore, due to the light taking so long to reach us.
I think to obtain any sort of merit in this field of study, you first need to undertake a Diploma in CrackPipe Technology or the Benefits of Drug Abuse DOE Award!
I think to obtain any sort of merit in this field of study, you first need to undertake a Diploma in CrackPipe Technology or the Benefits of Drug Abuse DOE Award!
22 February 2010, 06:20 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get on Google / YouTube:
Carl Sagan Cosmos
You can look for his explanation, very nice indeed. He was really cool scientist, who believed very much in making science appeal to everyone.
Carl Sagan Cosmos
You can look for his explanation, very nice indeed. He was really cool scientist, who believed very much in making science appeal to everyone.
22 February 2010, 08:20 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One that always gets me when looking into the sky at night, is looking at a star, not any one in particular and then thinking what I am looking at might not even exist anymore, due to the light taking so long to reach us.
I think to obtain any sort of merit in this field of study, you first need to undertake a Diploma in CrackPipe Technology or the Benefits of Drug Abuse DOE Award!
I think to obtain any sort of merit in this field of study, you first need to undertake a Diploma in CrackPipe Technology or the Benefits of Drug Abuse DOE Award!
Have you heard of the theories on alternate universes? It goes something like, Every possible thing that could happen/not happen, has/does happen in another universe/dimension, and i believe it works in accordance with the fact that numbers are infinity. Or something.
It's very mind boggling and of course its only theory but they are strong theories. A friend of mine is fascinated with this sort of stuff and has lots of Einstein books etctc.
22 February 2010, 08:47 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is complete nuts, be even things we/they know as fact is mind bending. A spaceship must move at a rate of 7 miles per second to escape the earth's Gravitational pull, that London to Glasgow in 49 seconds
23 February 2010, 02:24 AM
#26
Would it be possible for me to travel as far as the Andromeda galaxy at more than the speed of light and return again equally as fast, slowing down to avoid burning up on re-entry, to recoup the time I have just wasted reading through this post ?? 
23 February 2010, 07:45 AM
#27
Can you imagine what the toilet arrangements were like in the Apollo capsule.
I bet the first thing Michael Collins did once Buzz and Neil were hurtling to the surface of the moon in the LEM, was have a good dump.
I bet the first thing Michael Collins did once Buzz and Neil were hurtling to the surface of the moon in the LEM, was have a good dump.
23 February 2010, 12:46 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: England
Posts: 2,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
23 February 2010, 12:51 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impossible. I think you mean "a little bit younger than they would have been if they'd stayed on earth".
Is that why Les looks so young
Don't forget that the earth is moving through space at 30000m/s (67000mph). Mars only moves at 14000mph, so Martian colonists would have a different time reference from earth.
Is that why Les looks so young
Don't forget that the earth is moving through space at 30000m/s (67000mph). Mars only moves at 14000mph, so Martian colonists would have a different time reference from earth.
I did feel" full of beans" after my "ten ton" trip in a Lightning!
Les
