Timeline for Does relative motion allow for speeds $>c$?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 23 at 2:54 | comment | added | The Photon | @bbqribs2000, If the observer is floating above the rotating body, not rotating, then it's possible that their rest frame is an inertial one. But also, the distant object won't be moving at greater than c in that frame. | |
| Apr 23 at 1:47 | answer | added | Dale | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 23 at 1:11 | answer | added | hdhondt | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 23 at 1:00 | history | edited | bbqribs2000 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Apr 23 at 0:59 | history | edited | bbqribs2000 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 81 characters in body
|
| Apr 23 at 0:58 | comment | added | bbqribs2000 | @Triatticus I'm just using infinity to represent an arbitrarily large number, should've been more clear. | |
| Apr 23 at 0:44 | comment | added | Triatticus | Infinity is not a number you can do algebra with like that, so those manipulations don't make sense at any state of calculation. | |
| Apr 23 at 0:36 | comment | added | bbqribs2000 | @ThePhoton is there any reason why an observer on the rotating body has to be accelerating? Is it not an identical scenario to them being completely stationary, and the object rotating around them? | |
| Apr 23 at 0:30 | comment | added | The Photon | The "reference frame of [the] rotating body" is not an inertial reference frame, so the rules you learned for things that happen in inertial reference frames don't apply here. | |
| Apr 23 at 0:02 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body; edited tags; edited title
|
| S Apr 22 at 23:54 | review | First questions | |||
| Apr 23 at 1:32 | |||||
| S Apr 22 at 23:54 | history | asked | bbqribs2000 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |