Does Special Relativity Affect Clock Synchronization on a Moving Spaceship?

E92M3
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
My friend and I disagree on this problem:

A spaceship of proper length 200m moves with respect to
us at 0.6c. There are two clocks on the ship, at the bow and stern, that
have been synchronized with each other in their rest frame. We, also
have a number of clocks synchronized in our frame. Just as the bow
of the ship reaches us, both our clocks and the clock at the bow read
t = 0. At this time t = 0 (to us), what does the clock in the stern of the
ship read?

My friend claim that the time at the stern must be zero since clocks are synchronized. But I said no, I want to apply lorentz transformation and found a positive time. Which of us is right? I used this argument:

t=\gamma (t'+\frac{ux'}{c^2})
In which the prime denotes quantity in the spaceships's frame. I then set t=0 and x'=-200m and solved for t'.

I really think that I am right but don't know why he is wrong. Please help us settle this.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are correct. Clocks synchronized in one frame (that of the ship, for instance) will not be synchronized when observed from a frame in which they are moving. Another way of saying this is that simultaneity is frame dependent.
 
Let me add that according to the ship when its bow clock passes your clock all of the ship clocks will read zero. But to them your clocks are not synchronized. (Clock desynchronization works both ways.)
 
E92M3 said:
I used this argument:

t=\gamma (t'+\frac{ux'}{c^2})
In which the prime denotes quantity in the spaceships's frame. I then set t=0 and x'=-200m and solved for t'.

I really think that I am right but don't know why he is wrong. Please help us settle this.

Think of it like this. Say a sychronising flash at the centre of the spaceship triggers the clocks fore and aft to start ticking. The rear going start signal gets to the back first (from the point of view of the ground observers) because the rear of the ship and the signal are heading towards each other, so the rear clock starts ticking first. In the meantime the forward going signal is catching up with the front of the spaceship which is going away from it. By the time the forwards going signal reaches the front and starts the front clock the rear clock will already have:

T = \frac{L_o v}{c^2} seconds elapsed on it, where L_o is the proper length of the spaceship. In your example the rear clock will show 200*0.6/1^2 = 120 seconds in the ground frame, when the front clock is reading zero.

This fairly simple formula takes length contraction and time dilation into account and can be obtained from rearranging the transformation you quoted and using a displacement of -200m for x. This negative displacement comes about because the origin of the moving frame is the nose of the ship and the displacement of the rear of the ship from the origin is in the opposite direction to the velocity vector which is taken as positive. I hope that makes some sort of sense :P
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top