Length Contraction in Special Relativity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of length contraction in special relativity, specifically focusing on a scenario involving an astronaut traveling at 0.9C and the observed length of their spacecraft from different reference frames. Participants explore the implications of relativistic effects on measurements of length and time, as well as the interpretation of these observations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the length observed by an observer as 39m using the formula involving gamma, but questions the discrepancy with the answer key which states 23m.
  • Another participant proposes two equations for time, t*, based on the distance light travels to reach the observer and the distance the tail of the spacecraft travels, leading to a calculated length of 22.95m.
  • A participant seeks clarification on the variables used in the equations and attempts to derive the length but struggles to reach the answer of 23m.
  • Discussion includes the interpretation of the astronaut's perspective, with one participant suggesting that the astronaut's observation may involve an illusion, while another counters that all measurements corroborate the contraction as perceived by the astronaut.
  • One participant suggests a thought experiment involving a ruler to help visualize the situation, emphasizing the difference between the instantaneous observation and the actual position of the spacecraft.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct observed length of the spacecraft, with calculations yielding various results (39m, 22.95m, and 23m). There is no consensus on the correct interpretation of the astronaut's observations versus the measurements made by an external observer.

Contextual Notes

Participants rely on various assumptions about the speed of light and the relativistic effects on time and length. The discussion highlights the complexity of the scenario and the need for careful consideration of reference frames and relativistic principles.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and enthusiasts of physics, particularly those studying special relativity and the implications of relativistic effects on measurements and observations.

bayan
Messages
202
Reaction score
0
In the SR section of my book there is a question like this.

An astronout is traveling at .9C.
The spacecraft has a proper legth of 100m.
a)what is the length observed by observer? I get this as I divide 100 by gamma which is about 2.29
b)Astronouts view is also effected by the time it takes for the light to reach him. What length spacecraft does he see when the spacecraft s tail is next to him?
I got the answer to be about 39m but in the answers section they have 23m.

Could someone help me with this please.

This is what I have done, is it correct?

43.6/C=1.433333E^-7 Sec. (Time it take the light in front of spacecraft to reach observer)

1.43333E^-7*.9C=39.24m (The length of spacecraft while the tail is next to him.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi.

I've joined a picture, because with words, it would be too confusing.

We can get two distinct relations for t*:

[tex]t^*=\frac{x}{c}[/tex]

and

[tex]t^*=\frac{43.6-x}{0.9c}[/tex]

Putting them together gives the answer: 22.95m.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.jpg
    Untitled-1.jpg
    10 KB · Views: 415
[tex]t^*=\frac{x}{c}[/tex]
Is the x 43m?

Can someone please explain it through so I can understand it better.

So far what I understand is first find how long it take light to reach the tail from head.

Then you find how long it has traveled by

[tex]{t^*}{.9C}={43.6-x}[/tex] then

[tex]{t^*}{.9C}-{43.6}={-x}[/tex]

but I can't seem to get 23m.

[tex]t^*=\frac{x}{c}[/tex]

[tex]t^*=1.4533^-7[/tex]

[tex]{t^*}{.9C}=39.24[/tex]

[tex]{39.24}-{43.6}=-x[/tex]

[tex]x=4.36[/tex]

Can someone please help.
 
Last edited:
x is not 43m, x is the unknown, i.e. the length of the rocket as seen by the observer.


By "putting them together", I meant

[tex]\frac{x}{c} = \frac{43.6-x}{0.9c}[/tex]

Then solve for x.


Or is your problem that you don't know where the two equation for t* come from?
 
Last edited:
I kind of get it now.

Is it that [tex]t^*[/tex] is the time it takes for like to reach the observer and science [tex]t^*[/tex] is [tex]\frac {x}{C}[/tex] we can change it to [tex]{1.9x}={43.6}[/tex] thus [tex]x=22.95[/tex].

I would really appreciate if you could run through it as well.

thanx
 
There exists a photon that parted from the nose some time ago, and arrived at the eye of the observer when the tail was right next to him. This is undeniable. This is the photon illustrated in the picture. Now, we defined the distance it traveled as 'x', since it is in fact, the length of the rocket that the observer will observe. At the time of emission of that photon, say t=0, the tail is a distance 43-x from the observer, and following the definition we gave of that photon, it reaches the observer at the same time as the tail. Suppose this time is t=t*. Then between t=0 and t=t*, light has traveled a distance x (at speed c) and the tail has traveled a distance 43-x (at speed 0.9c). This translate into the equations

[tex]t^*=\frac{x}{c}[/tex]

and

[tex]t^*=\frac{43.6-x}{0.9c}[/tex]


(I've included a newer version of the drawing, where I corrected a little mistake in the path of the photon)
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-1.jpg
    Untitled-1.jpg
    9.3 KB · Views: 430
This is an interesting problem...Clearly the "austronaut" can not be on the ship since the length would be 100 meters. However, if he is on the platform then he must stand a slight distance at a right angle to the direction of flight and so there is, possibly, a hypotenuse matter here, which can theoretically, I guess, be ignored if he is close enough.

What is interesting is that the observed contraction is taken as real, but the observation of the astronaut involves an illusion...right?
 
robert Ihnot said:
What is interesting is that the observed contraction is taken as real, but the observation of the astronaut involves an illusion...right?
I wouldn't phrase it quite like that. All measurements and observations made by the astronaut on his platform will corroborate the fact that (according to him) the ship's length has contracted. Even the light that reaches him from the front of the ship at the instant that the rear of the ship passes him is consistent with that, once the speed of light is taken into account.

I agree that this is an interesting problem. To better appreciate the second part I would recommend to bayan that he imagine that the astronaut has built a huge ruler in space parallel to the direction of the spaceship. As the ship moves by, he (or another observer in his frame) can see exactly where the front of the ship is because the ruler is right next to it. (Of course, this is just a thought experiment--lots of luck "seeing" anything as the ship zooms by. Pretend you have a super-fast camera that can capture the light at an "instant".)

So, what the astronaut "sees" at the instant that he passes the rear of the ship is an image of the front of the ship passing the "23 m" ruler mark. His is not misled into thinking that the ship is only 23 m long, of course, since he knows that the image does not reflect where the front of the ship is now (according to him) but where it was some time ago. He knows that now (according to him) the front of the ship is at ruler mark "44 m".
 
thanx for all your efforts.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
7K
  • · Replies 166 ·
6
Replies
166
Views
16K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 83 ·
3
Replies
83
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
12K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K