Stationary vs. Moving Clocks
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts"  Richard Feynman ( 1918  1988 )
§ Assume: system is moving "inside" stationary system with velocity and is carrying the following clock consisting of a light  flash source and a receiving photocell. One "clock tick" consists of a roundtrip light  flash and photocell reception:
suggested source of diagram: Richard Feynman's " Lectures on Physics  Vol. I "
Employing simple algebra for the above Stationary Clock (a) in system versus Moving Clock (b) in system, we get the following:
So as
What this all means is that as viewed from within Stationary system , time in Moving system
will appear to move more slowly  i.e., relative units of time become comparatively expanded  as relative velocity
increases as between Stationary system and Moving system .
Inside the Moving system , rest time
however moves at a "normal rate".
In conclusion, any "moving clock" moving at a uniform velocity in an inertial ( non  accelerating ) frame of reference relative to a stationary observer's clock will therefore appear to run slower!
§ Time dilation:
This concept of relativistic time dilation in special relativity is also shown in this American Museum of Natural History  "A Matter of Time" movie as well as PBS's NOVA Science program of the 1971 time dilation experiment aboard a transatlantic British Airways flight:
source: American Museum of Natural History  "A Matter of Time"
[ note: for those who cannot view this page whole, see quicktime movie ]
source: PBS's NOVA Science  "Time Dilation Experiment, 1971"
[ note: for those who cannot view this page whole, see quicktime or flash movie ]
Observed Facts: Flying eastward and then westward from the stationary U.S. Naval Observatory, General Relativity predicted a time loss of 40 ± 23 nonoseconds on the eastward bound and a time gain of 275 ± 21 nanoseconds for the westward trip; the actual eastward loss was 59 ± 10 nanoseconds going eastward but gained 273 ± 7 nanoseconds for the westward trip!!
§ Another derivation partially using both (c) above and referring back to "Albert A. Michelson & the AetherPart II":
§ Please also refer back to "Albert A. Michelson & the AetherPart II" as the mathematics is identical although the problem herein is subtly different.
[ Mail this page to a friend ] 




