Pages

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Light Rail

I have returned from my trip; big thanks to everyone who hosted me, and showed me a wonderful time.  I have a couple post ideas kicking around from my travels, but I thought I'd take a minute to give a quick primer on the special relativity issues I mentioned last time.

Special relativity rests on the idea that the speed of light is constant.  This may not seem like such a significant statement, but you have to consider that it means the speed is always constant.  Normally if you were chasing after something, all you need to do is go faster than it, and eventually you'd catch up.  However, if you tried that with light, no matter how fast you went, its speed would always appear to be the same amount faster than you.  This leads to some interesting effects.

Imagine we construct a clock that uses light as its timekeeper – it contains a hollow tube with a beam of light that travels down it, bouncing off each end; each bounce is a tick.  It might look something like this:
Now suppose we strap this clock to a rocket, and watch as it flies by.  It would look something like this:
The light is still going at the same speed, but it has to travel a greater distance, so the tick that we measured earlier has been made longer by the movement.  This is the relativistic effect known as time dilation.  Most other interesting effects follow from similar thought experiments.

One of the important restrictions of special relativity is that it only applies in an inertial frame, that is, a perspective which is moving at a constant velocity.  Technically, it doesn't quite apply to the situation I talked about last time, since my train had to accelerate up to speed, then slow down again, but we can adapt it as long as we're careful.

While on the train, clocks outside will appear to be running slower than my own, but since I accelerate before and after such observations, they are potentially invalid.  However, someone outside looking at my clock would be correct in noting that it appears slower than theirs.  Since the person outside stays still during my entire trip, their observations must be correct.  If the train takes a time t according to the stationary person, then they will see a time t/γ pass on my clock.  Plugging in the numbers from last time gives the 95 picosecond difference I mentioned.

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Walkabout

(Another old t-shirt design.  Credit goes to my dear friend Jen Trinh for the wonderful Einstein drawing.)

Tomorrow I'm heading off for a trip around the East to visit friends and family before I disappear into Michigan for grad school.  I probably won't be posting anything here for about a week, but the long train ride ahead of me got me thinking about the possibility of high-speed travel to other solar-systems.  I wondered about the relativistic effects of my own travel – my train ride shouldn't actually feel like 6 hours, since I'll be moving.

In special relativity, traveling at a velocity v causes time to slow by a factor of
The faster Amtrak trains average about 63 mph, giving γ = 1 + 4.4 x 10^(-15).  That means that while my trip may last 6 hours, it will feel 95 picoseconds shorter than that.  What a timesaver!

Monday, July 25, 2011

Zip Line and Sinker

Earlier today, Steve and I went to see Captain America.  It was very entertaining, but as usual, I have a physics nitpick.  In one scene, the Captain and his men ride a zip line down from a mountaintop and drop off onto a speeding train, landing with ease.  It seems to me it would require an enormous height difference to achieve the necessary speed to land on the train without being thrown off.

We can find the height necessary to achieve a certain speed using energy.  The kinetic energy gained by dropping a height h is
where m is the object's mass and g is the acceleration due to gravity.  Meanwhile, the energy involved in traveling a velocity v is
Putting these together and solving for h gives
Given the era, I'm guessing the train was a diesel engine, so its top speed would be around 100 km/h.  Plugging that into our equation gives 39 meters, or about 13 stories.  Also note that this is the minimum height, since it assumes that all his downward momentum gets transferred to horizontal.  If the zip line were at a 45° angle, it would require twice the height.  Don't let my pedantry put you off though; it was a great movie, well worth seeing.