Skip to main content

An astronaut leaves Earth in a spaceship at a speed of 0.960c relative to an observer on Earth. The astronaut's destination is a star system 14.4...

Each physical body has its own rest frame, the one at which this body is at rest.


The rest frames of an astronaut and a spaceship are almost the same (an astronaut cannot move very fast inside a ship). So there is no reason to distinguish between an astronaut and a spaceship.


Also, we must assume that Earth and a star have a negligible speed relative to each other, so their rest frames are almost non-moving relative to each other. In such a case, an observer on Earth is almost at rest relative to a star, and the distance between Earth and a star, as measured from Earth, is the largest among all frames of reference (a so-called proper length).


For a moving observer--an astronaut, for example--this distance is shorter by Lorentz factor `sqrt(1-v^2/c^2).` So "according to the astronaut," which is the same as "at the rest frame of an astronaut," the distance will be less and the duration of the flight for him will be less.


So your friend's calculation is correct for an observer on Earth. Your formula gives correct distance for an astronaut, but to find the time we have to divide it by the speed,  `t=(14.4 * sqrt(1-0.96^2))/0.96 = 4.2` (years).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more