Another time dilation question

PatPwnt
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Say we synchronize two clocks in a spaceship each at the opposite ends of the ship a length of x'. Now we accelerate the ship to a velocity v with respect the the initial rest frame. So now according to the rest frame. The clocks are out-of-sync by vx'/c^2. What exactly happened to the clocks when they were accelerating to make one of them ahead of the other in the rest frame? Or is this all wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Good but ambiguous question.

An extended object, like a space ship, cannot remain Born rigid during acceleration. To avoid confusion I would advice to rephrase the question into:

Two test masses at rest with respect to each other with a radar distance of r accelerate at the same time (using Einstein's synchronization convention) with a proper acceleration a. After this acceleration is their radar distance still r and are their clocks in sync?
 
This old thread addresses exactly that question and has some equations and diagrams that should be helpful to you.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=216113

As a general rule the clocks will not still be synchronised after the acceleration except under some very careful set up acceleration schemes. Born rigid acceleration does not result in the clocks remaining synchronised and as Jennefir has aluded to, extended objects would not, as a rule, naturally undergo Born rigid acceleration unless every atom of the extended object had its own carefully synchronised rocket moter.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top