## [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

Guest wrote:Δt' is the MOVING frame, not the rest frame. So YOUR time is slower, not their time.
It's been here for more than a hundred years, and people still don't get what RELATIVITY means? Come on....

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

drkaii wrote: is the equation. Δt' is larger than Δt, i.e. the length of a second you observe when looking at the other object is longer than your own, so you perceive them moving through time slower. The fact that one ages at all is part of the "paradox" already
Δt' is the MOVING frame, not the rest frame. So YOUR time is slower, not their time. So the comic is right. You totally misunderstand the "paradox".

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

Regarding the riddle with PhysicsGirl, I was thinking of a different answer following their brainstorm.
First of all, let's assume that the 1st prisoner getting away with it is always a matter of luck.

Their answer assumes that there's an even number of prisoners, so that there's an odd number of hats of one certain color in front of the 1st prisoner.
If this was not the case, there is either and odd number of each color or an even number of each color in front of him, so that first approach fails.

In that situation, the 1st can save the 2nd one's life by saying his color.
On the other hand, the 2nd may be forced to choose between his own life and that of the guy in front of him. Suppose this line:

Code: Select all

``````01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13
G  G  P  G  G  P  P  G  P  G  P  G  G``````
#1 says G to save his mate's life
#2 can say G and save his life OR say P to indicate that there's an odd number of P's ahead of him.

So a different solutionwould be voice pitch.
The 1st one will save the 2nd one's life by telling him his color.
The 2nd one will say his color in a normal voice if the hat ahead is the same color as his or in a high pitch if it isn't.
This way, if the first one's lucky, you 100% success. If he's not... well, it's just one.

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

drkaii is correct: while traveling near light speed, both sides observe the other to be moving slowly. The change which allows one side to observe less passage of time than the other happens during the acceleration to return and the decelleration to stop at the end. For the portion of the journey the comic describes, the "other humans" would appear to be living very long thus more significant lives.

No paradox, just acceleration and velocity imposing different impacts on the observed passage of time.

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

If I remember my Orson Scott Card books correctly, If I travel at near-lightspeed for two years in my time reference, then when I return home all of my loved ones will have aged 80 years. So their lives were over in a blink compared to mine. Comic is right.

But really I came here just to appreciate the Calvin & Hobbes philosophy & sledding homage.

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

is the equation. Δt' is larger than Δt, i.e. the length of a second you observe when looking at the other object is longer than your own, so you perceive them moving through time slower. The fact that one ages at all is part of the "paradox" already

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

No actually the OP is right: if you're travelling near c relative to someone else, you see their time as running slow AND they see your time as running slow. The reason the twin "paradox" results in the travelling twin being younger is because they have to accelerate in order to come back to Earth.

So, this joke doesn't work, since the moral relativist should value the people's lives more the faster they are travelling relative to them.

### Re: [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

No, he has it right - the faster you go compared to a relative frame, the slower YOUR time becomes. Think of the "standard" example - you fly to another star at near light speed, then return to find your twin is now decades older while you've only aged a few weeks. Their time went by in the blink of an eye.

And this is actually a fine form of morality. Think about it a moment - you would have to be doing 0.8 c before your concern for someone was decreased by one half. At any kind of normal speed possible on Earth, you couldn't tell the drop in your morality from 1.0. So for all intents and purposes, relativistic morality cannot be distinguished from Newtonian morality.

### [2017-04-03] Moral Relativity

C'mon Zach, you're a physics buff, you know that if you were travelling at near the speed of light relative to Earth you'd see the humans moving more slowly, not faster.

I call broken joke due to brain fart.

Also, unoriginal: https://xkcd.com/103/