About rotating reference system

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of the Equivalence Principle in the context of a rotating cylinder and its relationship with spin and magnetism. Participants explore whether an observer inside a rotating cylinder can distinguish between the effects of rotation and an equivalent magnetic field through various experiments.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that an observer inside a rotating cylinder cannot determine the state of motion, similar to an observer in an accelerating cabin, referencing the Equivalence Principle.
  • Others propose that the inertial effects of rotation could be indistinguishable from gravitational effects, raising questions about the nature of the forces involved.
  • A participant introduces the idea that a gyroscope or pendulum may not clearly indicate the cause of its motion due to potential magnetic forces acting within the cylinder.
  • Some argue that the Coriolis force could differentiate between a rotating frame and a gravitational field, while others contest this by suggesting that the effects may be too minuscule to observe in a large cylinder.
  • There is a discussion about the concept of an "equivalence magnetic field," with some participants questioning its definition and implications.
  • One participant draws parallels between the motion of a spinning gyroscope in a rotating system and the motion of a charged particle in a magnetic field, suggesting they may be indistinguishable under certain conditions.
  • Another participant mentions experiments related to the motion of tornados or typhoons as evidence for their claims about the motion of gyroscopes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on whether the effects of rotation can be distinguished from those of an equivalent magnetic field. There is no consensus on the implications of the Equivalence Principle in this context, and multiple competing perspectives remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various assumptions about the nature of forces and frames of reference, including the conditions under which the Equivalence Principle applies. There are unresolved questions regarding the definitions and implications of terms like "equivalence magnetic field."

galaphy
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I seem remember somewhere there was a thread last year to discuss about what happens inside a rotating cylinder. It's to say if the obsever inside a rotating cylinder(big enough) can find out the motion state of the rotating cyclinder by experiments inside it.
I would rather say no, just like the observer inside the accelerating cabin cannot find if the cabin is accelerating or in a gravitation field. This is what the Equivalent Principle say. Now I find it's really very important to talk about this question as it deals with an Equivalent Principle between spin and magnetism.
Could anyone give me the link to this former thread?(I could hardly remember if I found it somewhere else)
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by galaphy
Now I find it's really very important to talk about this question as it deals with an Equivalent Principle between spin and magnetism.

I believe I was the original author of that thread (wherever it is); it had to do with the relationship of Equivalence Principle, spin and angular momentum.

What are your ideas relating spin and magnetism with regards to rotation inside a cylinder?

Creator
:smile:
 
Last edited:


Originally posted by Creator
I believe I was the original author of that thread (wherever it is); it had to do with the relationship of Equivalence Principle, spin and angular momentum.

What are your ideas relating spin and magnetism with regards to rotation inside a cylinder?

Creator
:smile:

Great, Creator, Where did you put your thread? I want to read all the discussions about it. I cannot find it now. Sure, I know one may think that the observer can judge the rotation of the cyclinder by a spinning gyroscope or something like that, such as a free single pendulum. Is it right?
But by introducing a new kind of magnetic force, he won't be able to distinguish if the procession of the gyroscope or pendulum was caused by this force or by the rotation of the cylinder. This is actually the same in Einstein's acceleration cabin. This is my new thought about rotation. What do you think about it?
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by galaphy
...just like the observer inside the accelerating cabin cannot find if the cabin is accelerating or in a gravitation field. This is what the Equivalent Principle say.

In fact it´s possible to differ between acceleration and gravitation. If the gravitational field is spherical (e.g. the Earth´s) it will also pull things in the cabin towards the centre and thereby show its existence. Thus the equivalent principle really only says something about local frames of reference (i.e. it only holds "point by point").
 
Last edited:
The point of Eintein's equivalence princple was to attribute gravitation to an inertial effect (or, in the Machian context, vice versa). So, in principle, the inertial effects of the rotation of a cylinder cannot be distinguished from the gravitational effects of a spinning source (or spinning universe).
 
Originally posted by turin
The point of Eintein's equivalence princple was to attribute gravitation to an inertial effect (or, in the Machian context, vice versa). So, in principle, the inertial effects of the rotation of a cylinder cannot be distinguished from the gravitational effects of a spinning source (or spinning universe).

Excuse me but I didn´t really understand this. What do you mean by "in principle"?
 
EL,
Let me start by saying that I wasn't in disagreement with you.

By "in principle" I meant, "assuming that an infinite, uniform, straight line of mass extended through the universe, and no other mass existed in the universe. Then, according to Mach's principle, a reference point that observes a spinning line of mass is equivalent to a reference point that is in a circular orbit around a stationary line of mass."
 
Well, I can understand what you're saying. You're quite right at those points. But what I want to know about is if we can distinguish the rotation of the cyclinder and an equivalence magnetic field in side it when one thinks there is a magnetic force exert to the gyroscope or pendulum.
 
The "coriolis force" on something thrown from one side of the cylinder to another would distinguish it from a gravitational field wouldn't it? Of course, if you are talking about a REALLY huge cylinder, that might be miniscule.
 
  • #10
Originally posted by galaphy
... what I want to know about is if we can distinguish the rotation of the cyclinder and an equivalence magnetic field in side it ...
What is an "equivalence magnetic field?" If you are talking about a gravitomagnetic field, then, in the real universe filled with other mass and energy, my answer is, "yes, even a gravetomagnetic field can be distinguished from a rotating frame." It just raises the philosophical question of, "is the cylinder rotating, or the rest of the universe?"
 
  • #11
Originally posted by HallsofIvy
The "coriolis force" on something thrown from one side of the cylinder to another would distinguish it from a gravitational field wouldn't it? Of course, if you are talking about a REALLY huge cylinder, that might be miniscule.

I think not, since Corriolis force effects things on Earth like weather systems and sattelite navigation.

Somebody double check me on this, but I think it is fairly self-evident that the effects of rotation within a rotating cylinder should be indistinguishable from those observed on the surface of a rotating body with equivilent gravitational influence. That is, if one stands on the equator of a planet with the same diameter as the rotating cylinder, and the planet is rotating at the same speed as that cylinder, but generating a gravitational "pull" of 1G, gyroscopes, pendulums, and all other experimentation should behave identically on the planet's surface or in the cylinder.
 
  • #12
OK, I'd say directly, the equivalent magnetic force isn't the gravitomagnetic force. The most interesting thing I found is that, with the coriolis force, a spinning gyroscope will circle a center when it moves inside the cylinder in the plane which is perpendicular to the rotating axis(one may be able to prove this with mathematics). this force is equivalent to the magnetic force a charge meets in a magnetci field. It's to say, I can not distinguish if the spinning gyroscope is moving in a equivalent magnetic field or inside a cylinder(large enough).
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Galaphy,
I didn't follow what you were saying. Is the gyroscope charged? What does "circle a center" mean? What force is eq. to the mag. force? The Coriolis force isn't.
 
  • #14
Originally posted by turin
Galaphy,
I didn't follow what you were saying. Is the gyroscope charged? What does "circle a center" mean? What force is eq. to the mag. force? The Coriolis force isn't.

No, the gyroscope isn't charged. It's neutral. The motion of a spinning gyroscope inside a rotating system is the same as the motion of a charge in a magnetic field(circumferential motion). So, the coriolis force to a spinning gyroscope inside a rotating system is equivalent to the magnetic force to a charge in a magnetic field. Then, if I think the gyroscope is a charge, I can't differ this coriolis force from the magnetic force.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Originally posted by galaphy
The motion of a spinning gyroscope inside a rotating system is the same as the motion of a charge in a magnetic field(circumferential motion).
Why do you think this?
 
  • #16
Originally posted by turin
Why do you think this?

I had finsihed some experiment on this. And you may find this regularity in the motion of tornados or typhoons near the poles of the earth. Of course you have to take the pressures from the air flows into account.
 
  • #17
Originally posted by galaphy
I had finsihed some experiment on this.
I certainly would like to hear about this if you're willing to share.
 

Similar threads

Undergrad Non-Inertial Relativistic Dynamics
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
High School Polarized Electron in a Rotating Reference Frame
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
Undergrad Galilean relativity in terms of homogeneity
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Undergrad Principle of relativity for proper accelerating frame of reference
  • · Replies 144 ·
5
Replies
144
Views
10K
Undergrad Does rotation in Gödel spacetime depend on the frame of reference?
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
Undergrad Follow-up Einstein Definition of Simultaneity for Langevin Observers
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
High School Time Dilation on Rotating Disk: Clocks on Disk Perspective
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
Undergrad Is an accelerating frame the same as an inertial frame at a point?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad What is a "rotating worldline"?
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Graduate Explaining the Geocentric Celestial Reference System
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K