Relativistic effects in WC

A

Arcadian15

Spaceman
Relativisitc effects in WC

Inspired by another thread, I started reading my Secrets of the WC universe, and there was a part about relativistic effects that kind of (IMHO) opinion explains how all the old pilots stayed around so long, like blair and maniac.

It's is based (quite soundly) on teh fact that the faster you move, the less time passes to you. So for pilots flying at spacefaring speeds they stay younger longer. So blair might have the physical aspects of a 32 yr old even though he's been a live for many more years. (I know it doesn't work out, but it's 4:30 AM:))

So I wonder if these age slowing side effects affect only pilots (cause they're more susceptible to relativity in their fighters) or anyone onboard a space ship in WC. (like mechanics, captains, etc.)?

Anywhat happy 75th post me!:cool: :D
 
w...t...F... ... ... are you talking about.

Just fyi btw, The charactor Blair plays in WC3/4 is about the real age at the time of Mark Hammil.
 
Compared to whom do they age slower? LOAF says speed indicators on fighters are relative to other ships in the surrender. Now let's say they are travelling at 1400kps (about the max afterburn value I can remember), and let's assume that it's really kilometers per sec. That would make their time dilution 1 / sqrt(1 - (v^2/c^2)) = 1/ sqrt(1 - (1400000^2)/300000000^2)) = 1.0000108890667439684840030451859.
So their time passes 0.00001% slower than everyone around them. For that to make a difference, they'd have to spend a serious amount of time in the cockpit.
Of course I don't know how much faster than the people on Earth they are moving, but it can't be much, since they already move pretty fast, combing motion of the Galaxy, the sun, the planet's revolution around the sun and the planets and the planet rotation about it's axis.

Sure they're a difference, but I am unwilling to believe it's years. Maybe, after 30 years of spending aboard spaceships, it'd make a difference of a few days, but just not much more.
 
Still, capships would have to be pretty fast if they are to get from one jump point to the next, or from a jump point to a planet in the system within a few hours. Then they might be moving fast enough to eventually show a slight prolonging of age.
 
Yeah, but if Blair thinks he's 32 and the world around him (read: people not on spaceships)thinks he's years older, then capships would need to move a around 50% lightspeed. That would also bring the following problem:
Say planet X is under attack. Cruiser carrying warhead is 10 minutes from firing range.
Carrier Y moves in to the rescue, at 50% lightspeed relative to the planet. 10 minutes pass aboard the carrier and they arrive. When they get out to intercept any missiles they discover the planet has been destroyed.
Why. On the ship passed 10 minutes, which means in the rest of the world 10/sqrt(1-150000000^2/300000000^2)=11.5 minutes passed.
And that's just special relativity. In the real world, you'd have to apply general relativity, which means gravity screws things up even more.
 
SO lets just say that blair is 32 in wc3 cause they wrote it that way, and that's the great thing about fiction, you can do whatever you want!


(REALITY ALWAYS GETS IN THE WAY OF MY COOL IDEAS)
 
Originally posted by Unforgiven
Yeah, but if Blair thinks he's 32 and the world around him (read: people not on spaceships)thinks he's years older, then capships would need to move a around 50% lightspeed. That would also bring the following problem:
Say planet X is under attack. Cruiser carrying warhead is 10 minutes from firing range.
Carrier Y moves in to the rescue, at 50% lightspeed relative to the planet. 10 minutes pass aboard the carrier and they arrive. When they get out to intercept any missiles they discover the planet has been destroyed.
Why. On the ship passed 10 minutes, which means in the rest of the world 10/sqrt(1-150000000^2/300000000^2)=11.5 minutes passed.
And that's just special relativity. In the real world, you'd have to apply general relativity, which means gravity screws things up even more.
Click to expand...

except for the fact that the people on the ship would have known about that and would have compensated
 
Unforgiven, you remind me of the first time our physics teacher tried to explain the "Twin paradox" to us... after he had finished we all pretty much looked like this: ":confused:"... LOL

But Relativity is a concept quite hard to grasp, since it seemingly contradicts many things we have been used to...
Therefore, I don't think the WC developer would even have bothered implementing it in the games... :)
 
I can't remember the velocity of light but I'm pretty sure 1400kps is fairly insignificant compared with it.

As for using jump-points, who knows what exact effects jumping will have on physics?

And that's my way of saying, I'd rather not bother with it.
 
Originally posted by Dak
I can't remember the velocity of light but I'm pretty sure 1400kps is fairly insignificant compared with it.
Click to expand...

Unless I misplaced a comma/zero, I believe lightspeed = 186,000 miles per second (either that or 186,000,000 mi/sec.)
 
Looked it up, it's just under 300,000,000mps so 1,400,000mps is less than 0.5%. Pretty slow in comparison.
 
The speed of light is as follows:

186 thousand miles per second and
300 thousand kilometers per second.

There.....ha.....now you know.
 
The point is that 1,400,000 mps is slow compared to 300,000,000 mps. And as you can see in the formula for dilution, the relation is calculated as v^2/c^2, which makes it even more insignificant.
Ah, I remember my masterclass Special Relativity very well. They were given by Prof. Dr. Nienhuis, and they were redoing the roof, which made a lot of noise. :(
Ah well, SRT is simple compared to Quantum Mechanics (I did that too).
Quote from some famous physisist:
"Around 1920, there were only six people worldwide that understood relativity. Nowadays I think almost everyone understands relativity to a certain degree. But I can honestly say that NO ONE understands Quantum Mechanics."

The guy that gave the masterclass QM (Dr. Eliel) also started by saying he was going to explain it us, but didn't understand it himself.
The problem is, no matter how many calculations and experiments you do that prove it, it just doesn't relate at all to what we can see, and therefore there is no way for us to even imagine it.
Tell me, honestly, can you form a picture in your head of a particle that is also an EM wave? Or of a single particle going through two cracks in a wall at the same time. That is the classic interference experiment: if you shine light on a wall with two openings, you'll see interference patterns on the other side. However, if you send light through the cracks one photon at a time, you still get the pattern. So what is that photon interfering with, and which of the openings did it go through? To get a pattern like that, it must go through both. And when you try to measure which opening it goes through, the interference pattern disappears.
So when you do a measurement for waves, the result is: photons are waves. If you do a measurement for particles, the result is: photons are particles. And even weirder is that goes for any particle, even electrons, protons and neutrons.
 
Originally posted by Unforgiven

Tell me, honestly, can you form a picture in your head of a particle that is also an EM wave? Or of a single particle going through two cracks in a wall at the same time. That is the classic interference experiment: if you shine light on a wall with two openings, you'll see interference patterns on the other side. However, if you send light through the cracks one photon at a time, you still get the pattern. So what is that photon interfering with, and which of the openings did it go through? To get a pattern like that, it must go through both. And when you try to measure which opening it goes through, the interference pattern disappears.
So when you do a measurement for waves, the result is: photons are waves. If you do a measurement for particles, the result is: photons are particles. And even weirder is that goes for any particle, even electrons, protons and neutrons.
Click to expand...
LOL Unforgiven.
There's a very good animation of this under "Quantum Theory", in Microsoft Encarta 1994... :D
 
Let me explain the theory of relativity in lamens terms as quoted by Einstien:

originally said by Einstien
The theory of relativity can be simply explained. Whenecer you spend two hours with a hot girl, and it seems like only two minutes. And when you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it seems like two hours. That, is relativity.
Click to expand...

And there you have it. The theory of relativity in lamens terms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top