Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9209 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,487 Year: 6,744/9,624 Month: 84/238 Week: 1/83 Day: 1/24 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Relative Motion (A Thought Experiment)
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 23 of 86 (127350)
07-24-2004 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Tony650
07-23-2004 12:59 PM


T650
The reason I'm having trouble getting my mind around this one is because I can't see how "motion" can exist as an independent quality on its own. Isn't the very concept defined by the relative proximity and position of multiple bodies? It seems to me that for "The Earth is moving" to make any sense it must have something to be moving relative to
If we are on the surface of earth aboard a train travelling at 60 mph we can use the train as a fixed reference point and state that the earth is moving relative to our reference point on board.
At the same time, I also have trouble accepting the idea that motion is some kind of indecisive quality that can (at least in principle) be switched on and off, dependent on the number of objects in the universe
It is not indecisive but relative to the reference frame.
Let's say that the one object is now a spaceship and I fire the engines. Am I moving? Is there any way that I could know if I was? There's nothing else out there for me to compare myself to but does this really mean that I'm not moving, or simply that there's no way for me to know that I'm moving?
Well the problem here is that you will not have a reference frame to establish that you are moving however if in doing experiments aboard the spacecraft you had determined that in all your trials that an object moves in reaction to an opposite force then you could tentitively consider motion on your part also due to the thrust of the engine.You could not verify that though.It would go a long way to explaining also why you experience the need to react to the acceleration by bracing your legs against it.
find it hard to believe that "motion" would cease to exist in this way because it seems to me that there would then be other problems. For example, could a tidally locked system like Pluto and Charon exist on their own, without falling into each other?
They would each orbit about the barycenter of their gravitaional system.
Now do the bodies stay separated from each other or do they fall together? My thinking is that they would stay apart, just as they do in this universe but the question is why? How can they be said to be orbiting each other, in a universe where there is no other point of reference?
One would orbit the other in reference to the other one.
This message has been edited by sidelined, 07-24-2004 03:46 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Tony650, posted 07-23-2004 12:59 PM Tony650 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Hangdawg13, posted 07-25-2004 2:23 AM sidelined has not replied
 Message 44 by Tony650, posted 07-26-2004 2:22 PM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 25 of 86 (127393)
07-24-2004 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by RingoKid
07-24-2004 10:15 PM


Re: am i way off
RingoKid
A point of reference must be seen to be evaluated as relative to your motion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by RingoKid, posted 07-24-2004 10:15 PM RingoKid has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by RingoKid, posted 07-24-2004 10:58 PM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 40 of 86 (127668)
07-26-2004 6:14 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Hangdawg13
07-25-2004 9:18 PM


Re: Relative orbiting
HD13
So does this mean that space is a product of the matter that is in it
No this means that space has no existence independant of reference to bodies within it. There is no absolute space. In other words it is meaningless to assign a motion to a single body in an otherwise empty void.
You are going to be learning to fly jets and if you do it will be necessary for you to develop a keen sense of your surroundings which you can only do by maintaining a reference frame by which to relate to "other bodies around you" and by that know your own motion relative to the space defined by those other bodies.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Hangdawg13, posted 07-25-2004 9:18 PM Hangdawg13 has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 54 of 86 (128034)
07-27-2004 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by Tony650
07-26-2004 2:37 PM


Tony650
What I'm trying to wrap my layman's head around is whether a tidally locked system actually can orbit, if it is isolated from any relative reference frame
This was my mistake and you are of course correct.I erred with this statement.
One would orbit the other in reference to the other one
It would not matter if they are tidally locked or not since without a background reference you could not say they orbit one another. You may be able to say that the body other than the one you are on was rotating as the surface view you had of it changed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Tony650, posted 07-26-2004 2:37 PM Tony650 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by Dr Jack, posted 07-27-2004 9:38 AM sidelined has replied
 Message 59 by Tony650, posted 07-27-2004 12:53 PM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 56 of 86 (128041)
07-27-2004 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dr Jack
07-27-2004 9:38 AM


MrJack
If there are no background stars to reference the accelerated motion by then how do you make a measurement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dr Jack, posted 07-27-2004 9:38 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Dr Jack, posted 07-27-2004 9:58 AM sidelined has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 62 of 86 (128838)
07-29-2004 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Dr Jack
07-27-2004 9:58 AM


Mr.Jack
You'd also be able to tell you're in orbit because it's the only way two gravitationally attracted bodies could be arranged such that the could appear not be approaching one another
But we are talking here about a void where we have no background by which to judge two bodies as gravitationally in orbit about one another.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Dr Jack, posted 07-27-2004 9:58 AM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Dr Jack, posted 07-30-2004 5:35 AM sidelined has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 68 of 86 (129072)
07-31-2004 1:05 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Dr Jack
07-30-2004 5:35 AM


Mr.Jack
If the other body appears stationary compared to yours, and there is nothing holding it there, you must be in orbit.
How do you determine that you are not both stationary since in this thought experiment it is implied {I hope} that we are confined to one of the planets? Also what experiment do you perform on your planet to determine that the gravity on your planet is also on the other?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Dr Jack, posted 07-30-2004 5:35 AM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by NosyNed, posted 07-31-2004 1:31 AM sidelined has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 6162 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 70 of 86 (129081)
07-31-2004 2:05 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by NosyNed
07-31-2004 1:31 AM


Re: Experiment?
NosyNed
Touche' Ned. Now how do we determine that this gravity acts between planets in such a way as to cause them to orbit one another?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by NosyNed, posted 07-31-2004 1:31 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by NosyNed, posted 07-31-2004 2:52 AM sidelined has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024