For instance, if the stellar engine is moving the solar system at relativistic speeds, would, say, a 5,000 light year voyage be shorter for the inhabitants of a planet, or would the trip still take 5,000 years from their point of view, as they are not moving in their frame of reference, the star is.
Asked
Active
Viewed 55 times
-2
Qmechanic
- 201,751
Ben Warner
- 709
-
3Does this answer your question? How long would it take me to travel to a distant star? – John Rennie Nov 14 '21 at 08:31
-
Not exactly, because I was wanting to know if the same effects would be experienced when a whole planet is being moved by the gravity of a moving star, or if being moved by the gravity means the planet itself isn't accelerating, negating relativistic effects. – Ben Warner Nov 14 '21 at 10:16
-
1Even the Sun's remaining lifetime would be insufficient for a Caplan thruster or any other stellar engine to get the Solar System to an appreciable fraction of the speed of light relative to the original rest frame. – J.G. Nov 14 '21 at 12:58
1 Answers
0
From an external observer's point of view, the trip would take 5000 years, but for their point of view, the trip would take fewer years.
In their point of view, where "the destination is moving" at near the speed of light, length contraction means that they interpret the distance between them and the destination as being shorter. This is why they perceive a shorter time as well.
Alwin
- 4,955