A question regarding a specific interval of time and GR

myoho.renge.kyo
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
A. Einstein states in The Principle of Relativity, pp 111 - 112:

"The modification to which the special theory of relativity has subjected the theory of space and time is indeed far-reaching, but one important point has remained unaffected. For the laws of geometry, even according to the special theory of relativity, are to be interpreted directly as laws relating to the possible relative positions of solid bodies at rest; and, in a more general way, the laws of kinematics are to be interpreted as laws which describe the relations of measuring bodies and clocks. To two selected material points of a stationary rigid body there always corresponds a distance of quite definite length, which is independent of the locality and orientation of the body, and is also independent of the time. To two selected positions of the hands of a clock at rest relatively to the privileged system of reference there always corresponds an interval of time of a definite length, which is independent of place and time. We shall soon see that the general theory of relativity cannot adhere to this simple physical interpretation of space and time."

It is now, according to my wrist watch (my wrist watch and the clock of the United States synchronize), 9:11 am, 10/9/2006, here in Burbank, California. Let the two selected positions of the hands of my wrist watch be 6:28 pm, 10/8/2006 thru 6:27 pm, 10/9/2006. Can anyone give me an example of how these two selected positions of the hands of my wrist watch (to which an interval of time of a definite length, 86340 s, corresponds) is not independent of place and time? Or how does this interval of time depend on place and time? Or what is the value of this interval of time if a different place and time is given? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'll assume you were on the ground floor of your building during that time interval. If someone on the second floor had been watching you, they would have thought your clock was running slow - and thus disagreed about the length of the interval. Does that answer your question?
 
myoho.renge.kyo said:
...how does this interval of time depend on place and time? Or what is the value of this interval of time if a different place and time is given? Thanks!
This is the case when a distance or duration measurement is done at a location A for a location B and these locations have a different gravitational potential, relative speed or relative acceleration or a combination of those.

Relative speed between A and B contracts lengths and dilates duration.
Relative acceleration between A and B change the amount of contraction and dilation.
Different gravitational potentials between A and B change shape and duration.
 
Last edited:
myoho.renge.kyo said:
It is now, according to my wrist watch (my wrist watch and the clock of the United States synchronize), 9:11 am, 10/9/2006, here in Burbank, California. Let the two selected positions of the hands of my wrist watch be 6:28 pm, 10/8/2006 thru 6:27 pm, 10/9/2006.

Can anyone give me an example of how these two selected positions of the hands of my wrist watch (to which an interval of time of a definite length, 86340s, corresponds) is not independent of place and time? Or how does this interval of time depend on place and time? Or what is the value of this interval of time if a different place and time is given? Thanks!

The time interval doesn't depend upon place or time. It depends only on relative velocity. So those in inertial motion at v>0 wrt you will record that your 86340s takes 86340s*gamma per they, where gamma=1/(1-v^2/c^2)^1/2. At say v=0.866c, gamma=2. So your clock runs slower per they, since they see you in motion and consider themselves stationary.

The Lorentz Transformation relates time between 2 frames via this equation …

T = gamma(t-vx/c^2)

X = Beta(x-vt)

The -vx/c^2 part of the time T eqn produces a temporal offset, and I suspect that this may be related to the question you asked.

You might want to draw yourself some spacetime diagrams, time as a vertical (t) axis, and 1-space as a horizontal (x) axis. If you are unfamiliar with spacetime diagrams, google for "Minkowski worldline diagrams". Draw up a stationary and moving observer on one diagram, plot it out, and you'll see some very interesting things. iT might them become much clearer, much quicker.

pess
 
wow! thanks to everyone that responded. i have a much better perspective of what is going on. thanks again.
 
Last edited:
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top