Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 301 Guests and 9 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Topic Options
#55904 - 05/23/16 06:36 AM THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE
969264409111 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/11/16
Posts: 21
Loc: California
A race is about to take place. In fact, it is the legendary tortoise and hare competition, but with a “big” difference. The hare is incredibly huge. In fact, that’s an understatement. He is the size of small mountain, with front paws each the size of a huge building. It’s important to visualize this – two paws, each roughly the size of a ten story building. Sounds bizarre, agreed, but hold that thought.

The other competitor in this race is the tortoise and he is equally disproportionate to what your or I would call normal in size – but in the opposite “direction.” He is the size of a tiny mite. He’s so small, in fact, that he would be just barely visible if he were sitting on your thumb nail right now. Look down at your thumb nail and take a second to visualize that tiny little tortoise – just a barely visible speck.

The race is about to be run on a typical, straight, dirt track. It is the one hundred yard dash. As you visualize the track, try to imagine the size difference between these two competitors as both are stepping up to a chalk starting line. A literally mountainous hare and a microscopic speck of a tortoise.

A starter on the sidelines yells, “Ready…set…” and then he fires his pistol.

Now, let’s start with the hare. Looking down, that hundred yard track between the Start and Finish lines, is far below him and it’s a thin, short, tiny rectangle which he knows he can cover with the slightest forward movement of one huge paw. Positive of his win, when the gun goes off, he simply lifts and slightly moves a single foot in a very leisurely manner from the Start line across the Finish line. And, of course, it’s across the finish line almost instantly. Piece of cake for the hare, right?

Not so fast.

The microscopic tortoise has looked at that same hundred yard stretch and what he has seen appears to be an infinite distance in front of him. In fact, just the Start line itself is an incredibly wide band of white chalk powder in front of him. Visualize his view! And picture how the finish line is much too far out there to even be visible through the expanse of boulders (grains of sand) and huge white dunes (the starting line chalk powder) in front of him.

But, perched on one of those sand grain boulders, this microscopic little tortoise is about to prove he's slow poke. In a word, he’s “lightning!” So, as soon as the starting gun is fired, he takes off like a shot – literally like a shot!
And who wins the race? Who would you guess? Well, to everyone’s surprise, the race is a photo finish – an exact tie!

And this is where the relative connection comes in. You see, by the standard clock on the sidelines, the hare and the tortoise moved at exactly the same speed. They had to, right? Because they both started on the gunshot, and crossed the finish line at exactly the same instant.

But think about what that “same” speed was like in each of their perceptions – their surrounding “worlds.” To understand this you have to separate these worlds and look at them individually. And, of course, you have to visualize.

In the hare’s huge “world”, as we’ve noted, the motion was a slow, leisurely movement of one front paw. He just lifted it up and slowly eased it forward, but it was so big, it was across the finish line in an instant. In the microscopic “world” of the mite-sized tortoise, however, the motion was lightning fast, much faster than any speed he’d ever dreamed of in his normal world. To travel that far in such a short period of time, he had to literally blast down the track like a bullet! Just imagine the view of something that small going a hundred yards in less than a second!
So here’s the big question:

Are these differences only perceptions? Or, is the speed
of an object and the time elapsed in its movement somehow
relative to its size?

According to the timing clock standing on the sidelines, the elapsed time was exactly, let’s say, a half of one second, which, when applied to that hundred yard distance, comes out to, roughly hundred miles an hour. But would a timing clock in a huge hare world have recorded the race slower? In his world, would that slow leisurely movement have been the equivalent of, say, a hundredth of a mile per hour, since all he did was lift one huge paw?

And, of course, the same question can be asked in reverse for the tortoise. Would a tiny little timing clock in a microscopic world have recorded a different speed? Since that little tortoise moved so incredibly fast to tie the hare, would he have been clocked in his world at, say 1000 miles per hour?

In other words, is size somehow relative to an object’s speed? Would three different clocks – one on the sidelines, one on the head of the tortoise and one (a really tiny one) on the head of the hare record different times?

Top
.
#55905 - 05/23/16 12:33 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
In other words, is size somehow relative to an object’s speed? Would three different clocks – one on the sidelines, one on the head of the tortoise and one (a really tiny one) on the head of the hare record different times?


If you apply the maths of time dilation to this question, the answer must be "yes", if you compare all three clocks afterwards they will all show different times.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55906 - 05/23/16 06:21 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
969264409111 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/11/16
Posts: 21
Loc: California
I had assumed the answer would be "no", but this has interesting ramifications. If size is a factor, wouldn't that mean that time passes at different rates for, say, a bacteria versus a blue whale?

Top
#55908 - 05/23/16 10:37 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
In General Relativity where you are standing to look at something changes what you will see. And time varies depending on your FOR (frame of reference). If the gravitational field varies between your FOR and what you are observing then there will be a time variation. The gravitational field around a bacteria will be different than around a blue whale. That means that time will be different. Of course in this case the difference will be so small that the time difference will be indetectable. If you look at larger objects the time difference becomes very large. If you watch somebody falling into a black hole then you will see their time become extremely slow. In fact you will never see them actually reach the black hole event horizon. Of course to the person falling there will be no difference in time. However, if they could observe your time it would become extremely fast.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55923 - 05/26/16 12:31 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
If size is a factor, wouldn't that mean that time passes at different rates for, say, a bacteria versus a blue whale?


I came across an interesting idea recently, that a creature's perception of time is related to its life expectation such that the shorter its life span, the slower it perceives the passage of time. This explains why (eg) a fly can react so quickly. What seems like a fraction of a second to us would be quite a long time in the fly's perception.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55925 - 05/26/16 01:12 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: Bill S.]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
I came across an interesting idea recently, that a creature's perception of time is related to its life expectation such that the shorter its life span, the slower it perceives the passage of time. This explains why (eg) a fly can react so quickly. What seems like a fraction of a second to us would be quite a long time in the fly's perception.


I know nothing about that sort of thing, but I will go ahead and show my brilliance by making some guesses.

It seems to me that the size of the fly might have something to do with its reaction time. The mass of the flies wings is so small that they can accelerate very quickly under relatively small forces. Also the length of the nerves is very short, so transmission time from the brain to the muscles would be very short.

As to the flies perception of time, I have no idea.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55926 - 05/26/16 08:58 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: Bill]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
As to the flies perception of time, I have no idea.


I seriously doubt that anyone has, but when has lack of knowledge ever been a bar to speculation|? smile
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55927 - 05/26/16 10:31 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
969264409111 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/11/16
Posts: 21
Loc: California
Suppose the example were taken to an extreme? What if a person is sitting far outside what is about to become our universe, just before the Big Bang (I realize the general consensus is that nothing exists outside of our universe).

This person is so large and so far away that the initial explosion/expansion appears something like a nuclear fireball at a very great distance. Then, of course, it continues to expand for nearly 14 Billion years. And during that time, we humans and other living organisms appear. We perceive the passage of time according to our world and points of reference that surround us, and that's how we calculate the expansion time of 14 Billion years.

Does time pass at a different rate for the tremendous outside observer? Does it take 14 billions years (of our time) for him or her to watch this occur?

Top
#55928 - 05/26/16 10:50 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Well, it takes 14 billion years of our time for the external observer to witness the evolution of our universe up to this point, according to our clock. The problem then is determining at what speed the external observer's clock runs. We have no idea what the physical laws governing such an external observer would look like. There is a good chance that they would be tremendously different from those that hold here in our universe. In fact to observe our universe it would almost certainly have to exist in more than 3+1* dimensions, so that it could understand what it was observing. Since we are talking about an imaginary observer we can set its clock speed to anything we want. That of course assumes that it uses clocks. An external observer with more 3+1 dimensions might not actually have clocks as such.

*In case you aren't familiar with the designation 3+1 dimensions, that means 3 spacial dimensions and 1 time dimension, which is how we perceive our universe.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55932 - 05/28/16 01:19 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
Quote:
In other words, is size somehow relative to an object’s speed? Would three different clocks – one on the sidelines, one on the head of the tortoise and one (a really tiny one) on the head of the hare record different times?


clocks dont record time they are used to measure time.

if each of the clocks were designed to measure time in sync with
the other two clocks then there is no reason that the clocks would
measure any differences of time measurements between the three clocks.

my answer although dull unlike the previous answers is NO.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55933 - 05/29/16 06:13 AM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
969264409111 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/11/16
Posts: 21
Loc: California

What if the measurement was speed instead of time? The speed of the Tortoise and the Hare? The tortoise zipping down track, and Hare leisurely lifting it's huge foot and moving it slightly forward.

Top
#55934 - 05/29/16 02:24 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
if the three clocks were replaced by speedometers that were
each designed to correctly measure the distance traveled in
a given amount of time then there would be no reason for the
three speedometers to measure any thing except the distance that
the speedometers had moved.

1) the speedometer (was the clock) on the sideline

registers zero because it does not move.

2) the speedometer (was the clock) on the top of the hares head would also register zero as he does not need to move his head in order to finish the race , he simply moves his foot forward slightly.

so in order to correctly measure the distance that the hares foot
travels the speedometer would need to be mounted on the tip of
his foot ( the foot that he moves forward slightly ).

the hare would have traveled the entire distance of the race track.

think of a photo finish where the winner is determined by a
photo of any part of a contenders body that crosses the finish line first.

3) the speedometer (was the clock) on the top of the tortoise's head would register a tiny amount of distance traveled before the
hare won the race.

time would not change.
and distance would not change.

they do not change because both are nothing more than
measurements that cannot be altered.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55935 - 05/29/16 03:34 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
Quote:
So here’s the big question:

Are these differences only perceptions? Or, is the speed
of an object and the time elapsed in its movement somehow
relative to its size?


No.

a mayfly (24 hour lifespan ) and a ocean quahog (400 year lifespan)
both share our time measurements.

although the lifespan of the ocean quahog is 146,000 times longer
than the lifespan of the mayfly there is no difference in the measurement of time.

there are living trees that are part of a clonal colony
whose roots are 80,000 - 1,000,000 years old in Utah.

this root system is the largest living organism and the
oldest living organism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_trees

the Pando (quaking aspen)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)

also the Bible recorded a list of people who lived a really long
time compared to our current lifespan.

but all of the above lifespans share or shared our time scale.

for us humans our time measurements and our distance measurements are valid in the smallest scale of the micro or the largest scale of the cosmos.

those tree roots may perceive the passing of a thousand years
as we perceive the passing of a single year.


but perception of time between species of life cannot alter
our time measurements nor can we alter their time measurements.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55936 - 05/29/16 07:19 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: paul]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Paul
those tree roots may perceive the passing of a thousand years
as we perceive the passing of a single year.

I'm not sure, but that may be what 969264409111 was referring to. In fact any entity that can perceive the passage of time will use units that make sense to it. For us the 'natural' units of time are the day and the year, which are artificially subdivided into hours minutes and seconds. For other species the time division may be much different.
Originally Posted By: Paul
but perception of time between species of life cannot alter
our time measurements nor can we alter their time measurements.

We might not be able to alter their perception of time, but it will be possible to convert between our time measurements and their time measurements (ignoring the effects of relativity).

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55937 - 05/29/16 08:10 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
Quote:
but it will be possible to convert between our time measurements and their time measurements (ignoring the effects of relativity).


I suppose that plants and animals have used the sun rise and sun set
and possibly the moon phases and air and ground temperatures as their
internal clock.

all of the above can be artificially supplied in an underground habitat.

so I suppose that we can artificially manipulate their internal clock.

but we would need some form of communication to know what their time
measurements were if we were dealing with an animal or plant life that already
lives underground or in the deep ocean in order to convert their time measurements to our time measurements.

but the biologist already have that figured out I would think.

Quote:
(ignoring the effects of relativity)


I wouldnt have it any other way...LOL
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55938 - 05/30/16 12:57 AM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: paul]
969264409111 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 05/11/16
Posts: 21
Loc: California
What I failed to note in my questions and comments was could a very dramatic difference in size alter the perception of time and, if that perception is in fact different is the experience "reality". Dramatic difference.

Many of the effects of relativity do not become apparent until differences well beyond our normal perceptions are reached. For instance the changes in time as one approaches the speed of light.

In my little tortoise and hare story, the difference in size is significant and so it becomes apparent. Is time perceived by the gnat as it is by the hare? I don't think so. And if that is the case, is each perception reality? It seems to me it has to be. Maybe some of the distinction has to do with the difference between "speed" or "motion" and the passage of "time".

Top
#55939 - 05/30/16 02:45 AM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
I agree that their perception of time will be different. The first thing to realize is that time, in this respect is relative to how fast an individual lives. In fact this happens to humans over their life time. When we are young it seems as though a year is a long time. When you get older the length of a year appears much shorter. And of course our perception of time depends on many other things. If you are doing something that you are very interested in time may pass very quickly for you. You will wind up saying 'Is the day already over?' But other times it will seem as though the day will never end. So time perception is very erratic.

In general small things live a much shorter life than larger things. An individuals perception of time rate depends, in part, on how fast things change in its life. So a small creature that has a short life would have a perceived time rate that is much faster than a large creature with a long life.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#55941 - 05/30/16 12:30 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: 969264409111]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
Quote:
Many of the effects of relativity do not become apparent until differences well beyond our normal perceptions are reached. For instance the changes in time as one approaches the speed of light.


there is no reason for us to perceive any changes in time due
to increasing speed.

we have never experienced any changes in time due to increasing speed or anything else and the only way that we can perceive a change in time due to increasing speed would be through the use of math that has been specifically designed to show changes in time due to increasing speed.

Quote:
What I failed to note in my questions and comments was could a very dramatic difference in size alter the perception of time and, if that perception is in fact different is the experience "reality". Dramatic difference.


reality and the perception of reality are not the same.
our brains can cause us to perceive reality way beyond the
scope of reality.

and size does have an impact on the reality that our brains
cause us to perceive.

for instance your driving down a highway that is next to
a airport , a airbus is crossing the highway in front of you
while it is on its path for a landing.
you look at it and it almost seems as if it should just drop
out of the sky because it looks like its just barely moving

but in reality there is no way that such a massive aircraft
can just stop and drop , because its momentum is causing it
to move forward at that point.

it would have to be met with a force that is exactly opposite
its forward momentum in order for it to stop and drop.


Quote:
In my little tortoise and hare story, the difference in size is significant and so it becomes apparent. Is time perceived by the gnat as it is by the hare? I don't think so. And if that is the case, is each perception reality? It seems to me it has to be. Maybe some of the distinction has to do with the difference between "speed" or "motion" and the passage of "time".


the cosmos is not concerned about what we call time.

we invented the word time and the tools to measure time ourselves and our perception of time depends mostly on the tools that we invented.

Quote:
Is time perceived by the gnat as it is by the hare? I don't think so.


I have no way of knowing.

Quote:
And if that is the case, is each perception reality?


reality and the perception of reality are not the same.

judging from our or my perception of reality
I would speculate that
to the gnat its perception of reality is real.
and
to the hare its perception of reality is real.

but the only way that either could know if their
perception of reality is different from the other
there would need to be some form of communication
between the two.

to try and fit this into your OP.

if the gnat had developed a wrist watch that he wore on one of
his appendages

and

if the hare had developed a wrist watch that he wore on one of
his appendages

and

if a human wearing his wristwatch and a hare wearing his wristwatch and a gnat wearing his wristwatch were all
lined up at the starting line before the race.

each species had developed their own time measurements
and their own tools to measure time and speed.

an human observer would look at the human contenders wristwatch and notice no differences in the movement of the second hand or the minute hand or the hour hand or the day , month or year displayed on the face of the wristwatch between his watch and the human contender in the race.

however when he looked at the hares wristwatch he may see a blur
as the second hand and the minute hand is spinning away really
fast.

when he looked at the gnats wristwatch he may see no hands at
all because they are all spinning away too fast to even notice that they are in fact there and the month dial is clicking away
as fast as the second hand on his own wristwatch.

so I could then speculate that the perception of time
is in the mind
and on the wrist
of the perceiver...



_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#55943 - 05/30/16 01:25 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: paul]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
there is no reason for us to perceive any changes in time due to increasing speed.


Do you use a sat nav?
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#55944 - 05/30/16 01:33 PM Re: THE TORTOISE AND THE HARE – A TIMELY RACE [Re: Bill S.]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4122
Quote:
Do you use a sat nav?


why do you ask?

is there a advertised or supposed reason for us to perceive
any changes in time due to increasing speed found in the use
of or process involved in a sat nav?

I just read an article that said that the proposed or advertised
time dilation theorized by einstein was supposedly due to the distance of a satellite from a heavy object and there was no mention about the speed of the satellite causing the supposed
time dilation.

heres the article.

Quote:
Two satellites that were accidentally launched into the wrong orbit will be repurposed to make the most stringent test to date of a prediction made by Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity — that clocks run more slowly the closer they are to heavy objects.


http://www.nature.com/news/wayward-satellites-repurposed-to-test-general-relativity-1.18780

so I'm concerned why you would post such a reply.

perhaps you have perceived that the time dilation was due to
speed because you read it somewhere or heard it somewhere
or used some of the designer math to calculate it for some reason

I no longer read einstein or concern myself with his theories and
especially his designer math ever since I took a really close
look at his math that is most definitely faked to prop up his theories.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.