Is the speed of light measurement dependent on local clocks?

In summary: Leo SartoriWhen gravity is taken into account, c is no longer a universal constant. c is always locally c in the absence of gravity.
  • #1
kmarinas86
979
1
Is the speed of light measurement dependent on the tick rate of different clocks?

Hello I want to ask the following questions:

If Clock A is undergoing only a natural gravitational time dilation, and possesses 0 rate of change in time dilation, and if it is measuring seconds at a different rate than Clock B, which for our purposes is a clock at higher gravitational potential where the seconds are different - what if:

Clock A was used in a measurement of the speed of light, and the value for this clock reads 1 second within which light traveled 299,792,458 meters. However, Clock B, which we will assume to have 0 relative velocity with Clock A, being in a higher gravitational potential, reads 1.000001 seconds passed.

If you take the "distance traveled by light / the time passed for Clock A", you will get a different value than "distance traveled by light / the time passed for Clock B".

Of course, you could take the reverse, where you have, say, 1 second passing for Clock B and .99999 seconds for Clock A

Am I getting this right?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Light only travels at c locally. The only speed of light you can directly measure is the speed of light moving through an apparatus moving with you, and that speed will always be c.

On the other hand, if an observer at high altitude watches some experiment operate at lower altitude, she might conclude that the speed of light "down there" is slower than the speed of light "up here." However, to an observer "down there," the speed of light is still c, and that's really the only meaningful measurement.

- Warren
 
  • #3
chroot said:
Light only travels at c locally. The only speed of light you can directly measure is the speed of light moving through an apparatus moving with you, and that speed will always be c.

On the other hand, if an observer at high altitude watches some experiment operate at lower altitude, she might conclude that the speed of light "down there" is slower than the speed of light "up here." However, to an observer "down there," the speed of light is still c, and that's really the only meaningful measurement.

- Warren

So the measurement by Clock B (the clock outside) wouldn't be meaningful then? It is only meaningful to measure the speed of light with respect to proper time? When (if at any time) is it meaningful to measure the speed of light with respect to coordinate time?
 
  • #4
Well, I guess I shouldn't say such measurements are not meaningful -- I just mean that no apparatus will ever measure the speed of light as anything but c.

You can't really measure the speed of light "down there" without putting an apparatus "down there." In doing so, that apparatus will always measure c. You could claim that the speed of light is slower "down there," because the apparatus's entire operation appears time-dilated to you, but someone comoving with the apparatus would disagree. So, we simply say the speed of light is always locally c.

Perhaps I'm not directly answering your questions; if so, I apologize.

- Warren
 
  • #5
I take it the above is the correct answer, but I am a little puzzled by what I just read, Leo Sartori, "Understanding Relativity," p263,

As Einstein pointed out, the difference in clock rates has another important implication: observers at two different points in a gravitational field measure different values for the speed of light. When gravity is taken into account, c is no longer a universal constant. It follows that special relativity is strictly valid only in the absence of gravity.

This seems to say, it is not just a question of "down there," but even in the same inertial system, a change in gravity as light signals are exchanged could affect the measurement of c.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the speed of light and how is it measured?

The speed of light is a fundamental physical constant that represents the speed at which light travels in a vacuum. It is measured by dividing the distance traveled by the time it takes for light to travel that distance.

2. Is the measurement of the speed of light affected by the accuracy of local clocks?

Yes, the measurement of the speed of light is dependent on the accuracy of local clocks. This is because the speed of light is often measured by using light signals and timing how long it takes for the signals to travel between two points. If the clocks used to measure the time are not accurate, it can affect the overall measurement of the speed of light.

3. How do scientists ensure accurate measurements of the speed of light?

Scientists use highly precise and calibrated clocks, such as atomic clocks, to measure the speed of light. These clocks are designed to be incredibly accurate, and any discrepancies can be corrected through careful calibration and analysis.

4. Can the speed of light be measured in a vacuum only?

Yes, the speed of light can only be measured in a vacuum because light can travel at its maximum speed without any interference from other particles or substances. In other mediums, such as air or water, the speed of light is slowed down due to interactions with those substances.

5. Has the measurement of the speed of light changed over time?

The measurement of the speed of light has become more accurate over time due to advancements in technology and instrumentation. However, the actual speed of light is considered a constant and has not changed since it was first measured in 1676 by Danish astronomer Ole Rømer.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
58
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
34
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
1K
Back
Top