Some under-used tests of SR?

  • Thread starter Nereid
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sr
In summary, the lack of a 'God Frame' is a difficult concept for newcomers to understand and is often demonstrated through phenomena such as time dilation and the twin paradox. There have been various experiments, such as the observation of muon decays, that have been used to illustrate this concept. Some experiments, like the Large Electron-Positron Collider, have shown correlations that can be attributed to tides and power spikes rather than a 'time dilation absolute frame' effect. Other experiments, such as the Turner and Hill experiment, have placed limits on unknown vector fields that could potentially affect clock rates. The Mossbauer effect has also been used to test for any small redshift that could indicate the presence of a 'God Frame'. Overall
  • #1
Nereid
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
3,401
3
I'm coming at this from the perspective of something that might be used in a general discussion piece on SR, or maybe the introduction part of a (low level) course.

One concept that's often difficult for newcomers to grasp is the lack of a 'God Frame'. It comes up in several ways, one of which is time dilation, simultaneity, the twin paradox, etc.

I'm wondering if there might be a way to illustrate this with a variation on observations of muon decays.

For example, suppose there is some absolute frame, in the sense that 'time dilation' varies according to your speed with respect to this frame (it's not a requirement that this idea be consistent, or even make much sense when examined too closely; it's just a 'common sense' foil).

Suppose further that this frame is not 'fixed' to the Earth.

A consequence of such a frame would be that the observed half-life of muons would vary, with an ~24 hour period (as well as, perhaps, a ~1 month one, and a ~1 year one). Or, perhaps, would vary depending on whether the muons were moving transversely to the (local, instantaneous) direction that the test equipment was travelling, wrt the absolute frame (again, it doesn't really matter how any such variation might arise, simply that it would, and in a consistent way).

Does anyone know where any such 'muon half-life' experimental results would have been written up? I'm curious as to the size of any 'time dilation absolute frame' effect that has been ruled out by any such experiments - again, not from the POV of any such idea, just expressed as "no such variation, to x ppm, was detected" (or similar).

One 'experiment' that I thought might be good to use for this purpose is the (1990s?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Electron_Positron" - the data had some odd correlations, which were tracked down to tides in Lake Geneva and power spikes from the operation of the TGV! Trouble is, I'm not quite sure I can draw a line between the sensitivity of the experiment and the detection of any 'time dilation absolute frame' effect. (Pity, it's a nice story, and so would likely be easily remembered by students).

Maybe if I make it a 'relativistic mass absolute frame' effect?

Another angle: relativistic electrons are to be found in all sorts of modern instruments and devices (aside: do ballistic electrons ever get relativistic in solid state devices?). Any 'time dilation absolute frame' effect would show up as secular variations in the performance of these devices. Are there any precision tools or instruments, such that you might find in a commercial setting, which would be sensitive enough to detect this sort of effect, say to 1ppm? Again, I'm looking for examples 'from everyday life', rather than 'in a research lab'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I believe there are some experiments with photons that are similar to what you describe.

From MTW's gravitation, pg 1064

Another series of experiments, called "ether-drift experiments", places stringent limits on any unknown, long-range vector field that couples directly to mass-energy. One can imagine such a field of cosmological origin.

...

For example, the experiment of Turner and Hill (1964) searches for a dependence of clock rates on such a vector field, by examining the transverse Doppler shift as a function of direction for an emitter on the rim of a centrifuge and a reciever at its center.

I'm not positive that this is what you had in mind, but it sounds close.

The Mossbauer effect was used to provide a very precise test, the amount of redshift expected is very small.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
This exact issue (absence of "God frame") is being resolved in this very forum here:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=88636&page=21

The experiments in discussion are all electromagnetic. The theory in debate is the "aether" theory of Mansouri and Sexl, the most powerful "aether" theory. As you will discover, there are tests that impose very severe experimental limits on it.
 
Last edited:

1. What are some examples of under-used tests for systematic reviews?

Some examples of under-used tests for systematic reviews include the trim and fill method, Egger's test, and the contour-enhanced funnel plot.

2. How can the trim and fill method be used in systematic reviews?

The trim and fill method is used to evaluate the potential impact of publication bias on the results of a systematic review. It involves trimming the studies at the end of the funnel plot and imputing hypothetical missing studies to assess the potential effect on the overall results.

3. What is Egger's test and how is it used in systematic reviews?

Egger's test is a statistical test that can be used to detect publication bias in a systematic review. It examines the relationship between the effect size and the standard error of the effect size. A significant p-value indicates the presence of publication bias.

4. Can the contour-enhanced funnel plot be used for all types of data in a systematic review?

No, the contour-enhanced funnel plot is primarily used for continuous data. It may not be suitable for dichotomous or categorical data as it relies on a normal distribution assumption.

5. What are the benefits of using under-used tests in systematic reviews?

Using under-used tests in systematic reviews can help to identify and mitigate potential biases in the included studies. It can also provide a more comprehensive and accurate evaluation of the evidence and help to improve the overall quality of the review.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
1K
Replies
63
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
89
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top