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

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more