Exploring Spacetime Metric for Clock A's Time Interval

In summary: You can use the Euler Lagrange equation for a geodesic to get rid of one equation.You can use the Euler Lagrange equation for a geodesic to get rid of one equation.
  • #36
betel said:
The second term has two be without the 1/2 because you get twice the same contribution from the t-r and r-t.
Then you can combine the two.
You also know, that it is back at r=0 at tau=4. That will be enough.If you take the correct equation for t it will be easier.

So I find [itex]r(\tau)=-\frac{1}{2} \tau^2+2 \tau[/itex]

and then the t equation becomes

[itex]
\frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2} + \frac{1}{(1+r)} \frac{dt}{d \tau} \frac{dr}{d \tau}=0
[/itex]

What do you mean by now I can combine the two? Do you mean substitute the for r into the t equation or do you mean do some further simplification? Presumably further simplification because substitution yields:

[itex]\frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2} + \frac{- \tau + 2}{ -\frac{1}{2} \tau^2 + 2 \tau + 1} \frac{dt}{d \tau}=0[/itex]
which doesn't look very promising!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
latentcorpse said:
So I find [itex]r(\tau)=-\frac{1}{2} \tau^2+2 \tau[/itex]
Dammit again, I only checked you had tau^2, but didn't check your factor which is wrong. You made a mistake when you integrated. Otherwise correct.

and then the t equation becomes

[itex]
\frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2} + \frac{1}{(1+r)} \frac{dt}{d \tau} \frac{dr}{d \tau}=0
[/itex]

What do you mean by now I can combine the two? Do you mean substitute the for r into the t equation or do you mean do some further simplification? Presumably further simplification because substitution yields:

[itex]\frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2} + \frac{- \tau + 2}{ -\frac{1}{2} \tau^2 + 2 \tau + 1} \frac{dt}{d \tau}=0[/itex]
which doesn't look very promising!
Well, that's possible to solve. But it is easier if you look a the bare t equations. Try to write it as one total derivative. Then you are down to only a first order equation.
 
  • #38
betel said:
Dammit again, I only checked you had tau^2, but didn't check your factor which is wrong. You made a mistake when you integrated. Otherwise correct.


Well, that's possible to solve. But it is easier if you look a the bare t equations. Try to write it as one total derivative. Then you are down to only a first order equation.

So do we agree that the equation to solve is

[itex]
\frac{d^2r}{d \tau^2} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\alpha \beta} u^\alpha u^\beta=0
[/itex]

But then using [itex]g_{\alpha \beta}u^\alpha u^\beta = g^{\alpha \beta} u_\alpha u_\beta=-1[/itex] for timelike curves we get

[itex]\frac{d^2r}{d \tau^2} +\frac{1}{2}=0[/itex]

As far as I can see integrating this straight up gives the same as last time?
Although I notice that if I do this with an auxiliary equation I get something with sine and cosine in it - this is definitely wrong so what is the reason why we can't use an auxiliary equation here?
 
  • #39
latentcorpse said:
So do we agree that the equation to solve is

[itex]
\frac{d^2r}{d \tau^2} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\alpha \beta} u^\alpha u^\beta=0
[/itex]

But then using [itex]g_{\alpha \beta}u^\alpha u^\beta = g^{\alpha \beta} u_\alpha u_\beta=-1[/itex] for timelike curves we get

[itex]\frac{d^2r}{d \tau^2} +\frac{1}{2}=0[/itex]

As far as I can see integrating this straight up gives the same as last time?
Although I notice that if I do this with an auxiliary equation I get something with sine and cosine in it - this is definitely wrong so what is the reason why we can't use an auxiliary equation here?

You are fine up to here. But upon integrating you forgot the factor. Just reverse check from your solution and you will see.
 
  • #40
betel said:
You are fine up to here. But upon integrating you forgot the factor. Just reverse check from your solution and you will see.

Oh yeah...it appears I forgot the basic rules of integration momentarily!

Ok so [itex]r(\tau)=-\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau[/itex]Now, as for this t equation, I really have no idea how to rewrite this. I assume we do something fancy with the [itex]\frac{1}{1+r}[/itex] and [itex]\frac{dr}{d \tau}[/itex]?
 
  • #41
latentcorpse said:
Oh yeah...it appears I forgot the basic rules of integration momentarily!

Ok so [itex]r(\tau)=-\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau[/itex]
Correct.

Now, as for this t equation, I really have no idea how to rewrite this. I assume we do something fancy with the [itex]\frac{1}{1+r}[/itex] and [itex]\frac{dr}{d \tau}[/itex]?
Maybe it will help if you multiply the equation through by 1+r, then it is easier to see. You will get it at once if you use the alternative version of the geodesic equation we derived before.
You can also insert the solution for r in the equation for the norm of the velocity which will give the same equation for t.
 
  • #42
betel said:
Correct.


Maybe it will help if you multiply the equation through by 1+r, then it is easier to see. You will get it at once if you use the alternative version of the geodesic equation we derived before.
You can also insert the solution for r in the equation for the norm of the velocity which will give the same equation for t.

Aaarghh! I'm getting confused.

We had [itex]\frac{d u_\alpha}{d \tau} - \frac{1}{2} \partial_\alpha g_{\mu \nu} u^\mu u^\nu=0[/itex]

so to match up with our t equation we take [itex]\alpha=t,\mu=t,\nu=r[/itex]
but then we have a [itex]g_{rt}=0[/itex] and I get confused because this removes all r dependence from the t equation so i have clearly gone wrong somewhere!
 
  • #43
latentcorpse said:
Aaarghh! I'm getting confused.

We had [itex]\frac{d u_\alpha}{d \tau} - \frac{1}{2} \partial_\alpha g_{\mu \nu} u^\mu u^\nu=0[/itex]

so to match up with our t equation we take [itex]\alpha=t,\mu=t,\nu=r[/itex]
but then we have a [itex]g_{rt}=0[/itex] and I get confused because this removes all r dependence from the t equation so i have clearly gone wrong somewhere!

No, everything fine. just remember the difference between co and contravariant velocity.
 
  • #44
You cannot really choose mu and nu, But by choosing alpha=t and as no metric component depends on t the last some will be zero.
 
  • #45
betel said:
You cannot really choose mu and nu, But by choosing alpha=t and as no metric component depends on t the last some will be zero.

So this tells us that [itex]\frac{du_t}{d \tau}=0[/itex]

But [itex]u_\alpha = g_{\alpha \beta} u^\beta = g_{\alpha \beta} \frac{d x^\beta}{d \tau}[/itex]

And so [itex]\frac{d}{d \tau} ( g_{tt} \frac{dt}{d \tau})=0[/itex]

But now what?

We know [itex]g_{tt}=-(1+r)[/itex]

So expanding gives [itex]-\frac{dr}{d \tau} \frac{dt}{d \tau} - (1+r) \frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2}=0[/itex]

But I thought we just showed that [itex]\frac{d^2t}{d \tau^2}=0[/itex]?

I appear to be going round in circles!
 
  • #46
Take a break. You have shown
[tex]
\frac{d}{d\tau} \left((1+r)\frac{dt}{d\tau}\right)=0
[/tex]
which is correct. No need to expand. You can directly conclude
[tex]
\frac{dt}{d\tau}=\frac{const}{1+r}
[/tex]
The constant still has to be determined but this can be done from the norm of the velocity.
Now just insert your solution for r and integrate.
 
  • #47
betel said:
Take a break. You have shown
[tex]
\frac{d}{d\tau} \left((1+r)\frac{dt}{d\tau}\right)=0
[/tex]
which is correct. No need to expand. You can directly conclude
[tex]
\frac{dt}{d\tau}=\frac{const}{1+r}
[/tex]
The constant still has to be determined but this can be done from the norm of the velocity.
Now just insert your solution for r and integrate.

The norm of the velocity for a timelike curve is [itex]g_{\alpha \beta} u^\alpha u^\beta = -1[/itex]

so [itex]-(1+r) \frac{k^2}{(1+r)^2} + \frac{1}{1+r} ( - \frac{1}{2} \tau + 1 )^2 =-1[/itex]

since [itex]\frac{dr}{d \tau}=-\frac{1}{2} \tau +1[/itex]
so [itex]-k^2 + (1-\frac{1}{2} \tau)^2 = - (1+r) \Rightarrow k^2=1+r + (1-\frac{1}{2} \tau)^2[/itex]
[itex]k^2=1+ \tau -\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + 1 - \tau + \frac{1}{4} \tau^2=2 \Rightarrow k = \sqrt{2}[/itex]
I took the positive root but presumably the negative is also valid or is there a reason for chosing one or the other?

And so [itex]t(\tau)=\frac{\sqrt{2} \tau}{1+r}[/itex]

Now I have to get the substitutions right - do I substitute [itex]t=4[/itex] or [itex]\tau=4[/itex].

Well we have derived the geodesic equations for clock B and so clock B will correspond to proper time in this case and t will be the coordinate time (i.e. that of the observer).

So [itex]t(4)=\frac{4\sqrt{2}}{1+0}=4 \sqrt{2}[/itex]

Is this correct?
 
Last edited:
  • #48
latentcorpse said:
The norm of the velocity for a timelike curve is [itex]g_{\alpha \beta} u^\alpha u^\beta = -1[/itex]

so [itex]-(1+r) \frac{k^2}{(1+r)^2} + \frac{1}{1+r} ( - \frac{1}{2} \tau + 1 )^2 =-1[/itex]

since [itex]\frac{dr}{d \tau}=-\frac{1}{2} \tau +1[/itex]
so [itex]-k^2 + (1-\frac{1}{2} \tau)^2 = - (1+r) \Rightarrow k^2=1+r + (1-\frac{1}{2} \tau)^2[/itex]

[itex]k^2=1+ \tau -\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + 1 - \tau + \frac{1}{4} \tau^2=2 \Rightarrow k = \sqrt{2}[/itex]
I took the positive root but presumably the negative is also valid or is there a reason for chosing one or the other?
Fine up to here. Either one is good, as time should run strictly monotoneous. Usually we choose time to be increasing
And so [itex]t(\tau)=\frac{\sqrt{2} \tau}{1+r}[/itex]
You have to integrate the derivative of the time and remember that r depens on tau too.

Now I have to get the substitutions right - do I substitute [itex]t=4[/itex] or [itex]\tau=4[/itex].
Well we have derived the geodesic equations for clock B and so clock B will correspond to proper time in this case and t will be the coordinate time (i.e. that of the observer).

So [itex]t(4)=\frac{4\sqrt{2}}{1+0}=4 \sqrt{2}[/itex]

Is this correct?
The consideration is correct, the value is not.
 
  • #49
betel said:
Fine up to here. Either one is good, as time should run strictly monotoneous. Usually we choose time to be increasing

You have to integrate the derivative of the time and remember that r depens on tau too.The consideration is correct, the value is not.

so

[itex]t(\tau)=\int \frac{ \sqrt{2} \tau d \tau}{ -\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau + 1} = \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{ -\frac{1}{4}} \int \frac{ \tau d \tau}{ \tau - 4 \tau - 4} = -4 \sqrt{2} \int \frac{ \tau d \tau}{ ( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

Now partial fractions gives me

[itex]t(\tau)=-4 \sqrt{2} ( \frac{1+ \sqrt{2}}{ 2 \sqrt{2}}) \int \frac{d \tau}{ \tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2}} - 4 \sqrt{2} ( \frac{\sqrt{2}-1}{2 \sqrt{2}}) \int \frac{d \tau}{ \tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=( \sqrt{2}-1) \ln{( \tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2})} + (1- \sqrt{2}) \ln{( 2 +2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

And so

[itex]t(4)=( \sqrt{2}-1) \ln{(2-2 \sqrt{2})} + (1- \sqrt{2}) \ln{(2+ 2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

How's that?
 
  • #50
latentcorpse said:
so

[itex]t(\tau)=\int \frac{ \sqrt{2} \tau d \tau}{ -\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau + 1} = \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{ -\frac{1}{4}} \int \frac{ \tau d \tau}{ \tau - 4 \tau - 4} = -4 \sqrt{2} \int \frac{ \tau d \tau}{ ( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]
One tau to much here.
But partial fractions is a good way to go later.
 
  • #51
betel said:
One tau to much here.
But partial fractions is a good way to go later.

Baah! I'm an idiot!

Ok so I get

[itex]t(\tau)=-4 \sqrt{2} \int \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}} \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} - 4 \sqrt{2} \int (- \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}) \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=- \int \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2}} + \int \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]= \ln{( \tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{( \tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

and so

[itex]t(4)=\ln{( 2+ 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{( 2 - 2 \sqrt{2})} = \ln{ \frac{ 2 + \sqrt{2}}{2 - \sqrt{2}}}[/itex]

?
 
  • #52
latentcorpse said:
Baah! I'm an idiot!

Ok so I get

[itex]t(\tau)=-4 \sqrt{2} \int \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}} \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} - 4 \sqrt{2} \int (- \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}) \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
How did you get the 1/4Sqrt(2) prefactor. Without that i agree
[itex]=- \int \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2}} + \int \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]= \ln{( \tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{( \tau -2 -2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

and so

[itex]t(4)=\ln{( 2+ 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{( 2 - 2 \sqrt{2})} = \ln{ \frac{ 2 + \sqrt{2}}{2 - \sqrt{2}}}[/itex]

?
I think you missed the lower limit.
 
  • #53
Sorry, i was a bit too quick. I get only a prefactor of 1/2Sqrt(2) and taking the lower limit gives me 4 times your result.
 
  • #54
We covered that point already.
 
  • #55
pfff, not my day. I missed the 2, so your prefactor is all fine. But you still have to include the lower limit.
 
  • #56
betel said:
How did you get the 1/4Sqrt(2) prefactor. Without that i agree

I think you missed the lower limit.

[itex]\frac{dt}{d \tau} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{-\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau + 1} = - 4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{ \tau^2 - 4 \tau - 4} = - 4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2\sqrt{2})}[/itex]

Now [itex]\frac{1}{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2\sqrt{2})}=\frac{A}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + \frac{B}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

So to get B

[itex]\frac{1}{\tau - 2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} = \frac{A ( \tau - 2 + 2 \sqrt{2})}{ \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + B[/itex]
set [itex]\tau = 2 - 2 \sqrt{2} \Rightarrow B= -\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

and similarly we find [itex]A=\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

this means then that

[itex]t (\tau) = -4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}} \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} - 4 \sqrt{2} (-\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}) \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=-\int_0^tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=-\ln{(\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})} + \ln{(2 \sqrt{2} - 2)} + \ln{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{(-2-2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

So [itex]t(4)=\ln{2+ 2 \sqrt{2}} - \ln{2-2 \sqrt{2}} - \ln{ 2 \sqrt{2} - 2} + \ln{-2 - 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=\ln{ \frac{(2 + \sqrt{2})(-2 - 2 \sqrt{2})}{(2-2 \sqrt{2})( 2 \sqrt{2} - 2 )}[/itex]
[itex]=\ln{ \frac{-12 - 8 \sqrt{2}}{-12 + 8 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

How's that?

Thanks!
 
  • #57
latentcorpse said:
[itex]\frac{dt}{d \tau} = \frac{\sqrt{2}}{-\frac{1}{4} \tau^2 + \tau + 1} = - 4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{ \tau^2 - 4 \tau - 4} = - 4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2\sqrt{2})}[/itex]

Now [itex]\frac{1}{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})( \tau -2 + 2\sqrt{2})}=\frac{A}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + \frac{B}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

So to get B

[itex]\frac{1}{\tau - 2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} = \frac{A ( \tau - 2 + 2 \sqrt{2})}{ \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + B[/itex]
set [itex]\tau = 2 - 2 \sqrt{2} \Rightarrow B= -\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

and similarly we find [itex]A=\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

this means then that

[itex]t (\tau) = -4 \sqrt{2} \frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}} \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} - 4 \sqrt{2} (-\frac{1}{4 \sqrt{2}}) \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=-\int_0^tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2}} + \int_0^\tau \frac{d \tau}{\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=-\ln{(\tau -2 + 2 \sqrt{2})} + \ln{(2 \sqrt{2} - 2)} + \ln{( \tau -2 - 2 \sqrt{2})} - \ln{(-2-2 \sqrt{2})}[/itex]

So [itex]t(4)=\ln{2+ 2 \sqrt{2}} - \ln{2-2 \sqrt{2}} - \ln{ 2 \sqrt{2} - 2} + \ln{-2 - 2 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]
[itex]=\ln{ \frac{(2 + \sqrt{2})(-2 - 2 \sqrt{2})}{(2-2 \sqrt{2})( 2 \sqrt{2} - 2 )}[/itex]
[itex]=\ln{ \frac{-12 - 8 \sqrt{2}}{-12 + 8 \sqrt{2}}[/itex]

How's that?

Thanks!
I think that is what I got. You should swap the denominator, otherwise you take log of something negative.
 
  • #58
betel said:
I think that is what I got. You should swap the denominator, otherwise you take log of something negative.

well I can simplify it to

[itex]\ln{\frac{-3-2 \sqrt{2}}{-3+2 \sqrt{2}}}[/itex]

Clearly that argument is negative which causes problems but what do you mean swap the denominator?

Also, why was it convenient (or necessary?) to rewrite the geodesic in that covariant way? Would it not have worked if we had just used the standard geodesic equation and if not, why not?
How did you know you had to rewrite it that way?

Thanks very much for your help on this question!
 
Last edited:
  • #59
latentcorpse said:
well I can simplify it to

[itex]\ln{\frac{-3-2 \sqrt{2}}{-3+2 \sqrt{2}}}[/itex]

Clearly that argument is negative which causes problems but what do you mean swap the denominator?
When getting log as the result of an integral you always have to take absolute values. So if you ignore it at the start, you have manually correct later.

[/QUOTE]
Also, why was it convenient (or necessary?) to rewrite the geodesic in that covariant way? Would it not have worked if we had just used the standard geodesic equation and if not, why not?
How did you know you had to rewrite it that way?

Thanks very much for your help on this question![/QUOTE]
Not neccessary, but this form of the geodesic equation is of more practical use in some cases. Otherwise you have to first calculate all the Christoffel symbols and then sum. Here if your metric does not depend on a couple of coordinates, because of the partial derivative the geodesic equation for such coordinates will be very easy.

And I knew it was a practical way to rewrite it because I gave the question to my students rececently.
 
<h2>1. What is spacetime metric and how does it relate to time intervals?</h2><p>Spacetime metric is a mathematical framework used to describe the relationship between space and time. It is based on the theory of relativity and takes into account the curvature of spacetime caused by massive objects. Time intervals refer to the duration between two events, and the spacetime metric helps calculate this by accounting for the effects of gravity on time.</p><h2>2. How does the spacetime metric affect the measurement of time intervals for Clock A?</h2><p>The spacetime metric can affect the measurement of time intervals for Clock A in two ways. Firstly, if Clock A is in a region with a strong gravitational field, the spacetime metric will cause time to pass slower for Clock A compared to a clock in a weaker gravitational field. Secondly, if Clock A is moving at a high speed, the spacetime metric will cause time to pass slower for Clock A compared to a stationary clock.</p><h2>3. Can the spacetime metric be observed or measured?</h2><p>The spacetime metric itself cannot be directly observed or measured. However, its effects on time intervals can be observed through experiments and measurements. For example, the famous Hafele-Keating experiment in 1971 demonstrated the effects of the spacetime metric on time intervals by comparing the time measured by atomic clocks on airplanes with those on the ground.</p><h2>4. How does the spacetime metric differ from the traditional concept of time?</h2><p>The traditional concept of time is based on the idea of a universal, constant flow of time that is independent of any external factors. The spacetime metric, on the other hand, takes into account the effects of gravity and motion on time, showing that time is not absolute but relative to the observer's frame of reference.</p><h2>5. What are the practical applications of understanding the spacetime metric for time intervals?</h2><p>Understanding the spacetime metric for time intervals has several practical applications. It is essential for accurate timekeeping in GPS systems, as the satellites are affected by both the Earth's gravitational field and their high orbital speed. It also has implications for space travel and the study of the universe, as it allows for more precise calculations of time and distance in extreme conditions.</p>

1. What is spacetime metric and how does it relate to time intervals?

Spacetime metric is a mathematical framework used to describe the relationship between space and time. It is based on the theory of relativity and takes into account the curvature of spacetime caused by massive objects. Time intervals refer to the duration between two events, and the spacetime metric helps calculate this by accounting for the effects of gravity on time.

2. How does the spacetime metric affect the measurement of time intervals for Clock A?

The spacetime metric can affect the measurement of time intervals for Clock A in two ways. Firstly, if Clock A is in a region with a strong gravitational field, the spacetime metric will cause time to pass slower for Clock A compared to a clock in a weaker gravitational field. Secondly, if Clock A is moving at a high speed, the spacetime metric will cause time to pass slower for Clock A compared to a stationary clock.

3. Can the spacetime metric be observed or measured?

The spacetime metric itself cannot be directly observed or measured. However, its effects on time intervals can be observed through experiments and measurements. For example, the famous Hafele-Keating experiment in 1971 demonstrated the effects of the spacetime metric on time intervals by comparing the time measured by atomic clocks on airplanes with those on the ground.

4. How does the spacetime metric differ from the traditional concept of time?

The traditional concept of time is based on the idea of a universal, constant flow of time that is independent of any external factors. The spacetime metric, on the other hand, takes into account the effects of gravity and motion on time, showing that time is not absolute but relative to the observer's frame of reference.

5. What are the practical applications of understanding the spacetime metric for time intervals?

Understanding the spacetime metric for time intervals has several practical applications. It is essential for accurate timekeeping in GPS systems, as the satellites are affected by both the Earth's gravitational field and their high orbital speed. It also has implications for space travel and the study of the universe, as it allows for more precise calculations of time and distance in extreme conditions.

Similar threads

  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
870
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
883
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
784
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
0
Views
375
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
612
Back
Top