The most puzzling issues that have emerged after Einstein's Special Relativity Theory (SRT) are
- Speed affects time of the object in motion
- Simultaneous events for one observer are not simultaneous for the observer that is in motion relatively to the first one.
Speed affecting time i.e. the age of an object is not logically incomprehensible as we can see on example of two identical plants one in the sunlight, and another one in a refrigerator. Under different physical conditions their biological age will be different after a while.
The second issue defies common sense (whatever that is) as two things happening at once at distant locations from the point of view of observer 1 can happen in succession for the observer 2. Such possibility is called the relativity of simultaneity.
I have analysed this problem and published results in a draft article "A Study on Invariance of Temporal Coincidence". The conclusion is that relative simultaneity is only an apparent effect of a particular clock synchronisation required by the framework of the STR.
Follow me on Academia.edu, Follow me on ResearchGate
In rough terms this is a similar situation when simultaneous distant events: one in Time Square in NY and one in Times Square Sunnybank, Brisbane Australia are identified by their local clocks. Because there is different time recorded from the clocks in each place it does not mean events are not simultaneous as the clocks have been synchronised according to respective time zones.
It does not matter if time is independent or not, it still exists this way or another.
ReplyDeleteI assume your comment is for the post above. It does not matter indeed but to understand and use time concept that is dependent on other entities one needs to understand those entities. To understand Einstein's time one needs to understand how clocks work and what is the relation between multiple clocks. Such time hardly seems to be an entity. More like a collection of measurements or if you wish, ordered events.
ReplyDelete