Register to reply

Experimental sticky (Hafele-Keating experiment)

Share this thread:
edpell
#1
Nov28-09, 10:01 PM
P: 451
In the experimental sticky it says

"They flew atomic clocks on commercial airliners around the world in both directions, and compared the time elapsed on the airborne clocks with the time elapsed on an earthbound clock (USNO). Their eastbound clock lost 59 ns on the USNO clock; their westbound clock gained 273 ns; these agree with GR predictions to well within their experimental resolution and uncertainties (which total about 25 ns). By using four cesium-beam atomic clocks they greatly reduced their systematic errors due to clock drift."

But it seems this does not match SR. Two planes take off from say New York City. One flies at a speed of a commercial airliner on some path, the other flies at the same speed on a different path. They both return to the starting point each having traveled the same distance at the same speed as seen by the observer that stayed on the ground in New York. But the two clock do not show the same time dilation! What does this mean?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Sapphire talk enlivens guesswork over iPhone 6
Geneticists offer clues to better rice, tomato crops
UConn makes 3-D copies of antique instrument parts
atyy
#2
Nov28-09, 10:06 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 8,372
They are moving at different speeds wrt to the earth clock because of the earth's rotation.

Edit: I didn't get that quite right. I think the earth clock is not inertial due to the earth's rotation, so what one should do is set up a global inertial frame, in which all three clocks should be moving with different velocities (or something like that, am not getting this straight off the top of mu head, but the earth's rotation is important).
edpell
#3
Nov28-09, 10:12 PM
P: 451
The speed of the two planes is it measured with respect to the ground? If so, they travel at the same speed with respect to the stay behind clock. If not, how is the velocity of the planes measured?

atyy
#4
Nov29-09, 12:10 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 8,372
Experimental sticky (Hafele-Keating experiment)

The sun rises in the east, so the earth spins eastward relative to a particular inertial frame.

To fly eastward, one must fly even faster relative to the inertial frame.
So the eastward clock will run slow.

To fly westward, one must fly slower relative to the inertial frame.
So the westward clock will run fast.

Did I get that right?

For the right answer see Clifford Will's "Was Einstein Right?" http://books.google.com/books?id=9Zu...gbs_navlinks_s
DaveC426913
#5
Nov29-09, 01:05 AM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,319
Bah. Commercial airliners are soooo second millenium.

This is way cooler: http://leapsecond.com/great2005/tour/
Vanadium 50
#6
Nov29-09, 01:18 AM
Mentor
Vanadium 50's Avatar
P: 16,166
Dave, that measures only the GR effect, not the SR effect.
jtbell
#7
Nov29-09, 02:21 AM
Mentor
jtbell's Avatar
P: 11,616
Quote Quote by atyy View Post
The sun rises in the east, so the earth spins eastward relative to a particular inertial frame.
...which is often called the Earth Centered Inertial (ECI) frame.
edpell
#8
Nov29-09, 01:03 PM
P: 451
So if we had a flat earth (say a box full of air 48 thousand miles long) and the box is moving at the velocity 1000 miles per hour (about the earth rotational speed) call it frame X. We start at the middle with two planes one flies "East" in the direction of the boxes velocity and one flies "west" opposite the boxes motion. After 24,000 miles of flight they stop and look at their clocks what do they see? If the box is an inertial frame then both planes traveled at the same velocity (opposite directions but same speed) in that frame and both should experience the same time dilation. If one the other hand we consider a frame in which the box is moving (frame Y) then one plane flies faster and one flies slower in that frame. So in frame Y one plane flies faster (more time dilation) but flies a longer distance and the other flies slower (less time dilation) and a shorter distance. So they both arrive at the same time in frame Y and in Frame X and both pilots have aged the same amount. No twin paradox. So how come the clocks in the experiment differ? How does going from a "flat Earth" to a round Earth change the physical measurement?
jtbell
#9
Nov29-09, 01:09 PM
Mentor
jtbell's Avatar
P: 11,616
Thread title edited to make it more specific.
edpell
#10
Nov29-09, 01:22 PM
P: 451
Hello jtbell in the ECI the west going plane has a lower speed on the night side of the planet and a faster speed on the day side of the planet. Likewise but opposite the east going plane has a high speed on the day side and a lower speed on the night side. So it seems in the ECI both have the same average speed. So why is there a difference in the two clocks?
atyy
#11
Nov29-09, 01:31 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 8,372
Quote Quote by edpell View Post
So if we had a flat earth (say a box full of air 48 thousand miles long) and the box is moving at the velocity 1000 miles per hour (about the earth rotational speed) call it frame X. We start at the middle with two planes one flies "East" in the direction of the boxes velocity and one flies "west" opposite the boxes motion. After 24,000 miles of flight they stop and look at their clocks what do they see? If the box is an inertial frame then both planes traveled at the same velocity (opposite directions but same speed) in that frame and both should experience the same time dilation. If one the other hand we consider a frame in which the box is moving (frame Y) then one plane flies faster and one flies slower in that frame. So in frame Y one plane flies faster (more time dilation) but flies a longer distance and the other flies slower (less time dilation) and a shorter distance. So they both arrive at the same time in frame Y and in Frame X and both pilots have aged the same amount. No twin paradox. So how come the clocks in the experiment differ? How does going from a "flat Earth" to a round Earth change the physical measurement?
In X, the planes fly in opposite directions with the same speed, so they will land at the same time. Frame Y is moving relative to X, so the planes will not land at the same time.
bcrowell
#12
Nov29-09, 05:34 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
bcrowell's Avatar
P: 5,584
A concrete way to get at this is that the three clocks have different accelerations. If the west-going clock could fly fast enough to cancel out the earth's rotation, it would have zero acceleration. In reality it doesn't quite fly that fast, but it does have the smallest acceleration of the three. By the equivalence principle, these accelerations are equivalent to gravitational fields, which cause time dilation.

There is also an effect from real gravitational time dilation, because the planes are flying at a certain altitude. This is the reason for the asymmetry between the results of the east-going and west-going planes, relative to the one back in Washington.

In the case of a GPS satellite, the gravitational effect is actually bigger than the SR effect.
edpell
#13
Nov29-09, 05:58 PM
P: 451
bcrowell thank you for your answer I understand now.

Would it be correct to say this is a general relativity effect (accelerations) as opposed to a special relativity effect (velocities)?
cfrogue
#14
Nov29-09, 06:28 PM
P: 687
Quote Quote by bcrowell View Post
A concrete way to get at this is that the three clocks have different accelerations. If the west-going clock could fly fast enough to cancel out the earth's rotation, it would have zero acceleration. In reality it doesn't quite fly that fast, but it does have the smallest acceleration of the three. By the equivalence principle, these accelerations are equivalent to gravitational fields, which cause time dilation.

There is also an effect from real gravitational time dilation, because the planes are flying at a certain altitude. This is the reason for the asymmetry between the results of the east-going and west-going planes, relative to the one back in Washington.

In the case of a GPS satellite, the gravitational effect is actually bigger than the SR effect.
This depends on the orbit.
bcrowell
#15
Nov29-09, 08:05 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
bcrowell's Avatar
P: 5,584
Quote Quote by edpell View Post
bcrowell thank you for your answer I understand now.

Would it be correct to say this is a general relativity effect (accelerations) as opposed to a special relativity effect (velocities)?
Just because you have an acceleration, that doesn't mean you need GR. You only need GR if there are gravitational fields. It's just useful to think about the accelerations because it shows that you don't have three different inertial frames; someone in one of the frames can tell which one he's in from local measurements.

This experiment has two effects, one of which can be understood purely using SR, the other requiring GR.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Hafele-Keating Experiment Special & General Relativity 3
Help me find experimental errors in my bottle rocket experiment, Hurry please? Introductory Physics Homework 9
Shades of the Keating Five Current Events 4
Hafele and Keating Experiment Special & General Relativity 3