Are the transforms instantaneous?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leo.Ki
  • Start date Start date
Leo.Ki
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hello Board,

When you accelerate, the world changes its spacetime "slant" with respect to your own frame. Is this change instantaneous throughout the whole universe? I'm aware that "instantaneous" is a dangerous word here, since we are changing frame when accelerating, but I hope you see what I mean. What are the consequences if the change is instantaneous, and what are they if it is not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Leo.Ki said:
Hello Board,

When you accelerate, the world changes its spacetime "slant" with respect to your own frame. Is this change instantaneous throughout the whole universe? I'm aware that "instantaneous" is a dangerous word here, since we are changing frame when accelerating, but I hope you see what I mean. What are the consequences if the change is instantaneous, and what are they if it is not?
Frames are just coordinate systems for describing different events in spacetime, it is just a matter of convention that each inertial observer should call "their" frame the one in which they are currently at rest, they could just as easily analyze things from the perspective of some other frame. So, it would likewise be just a subjective decision whether an accelerating observer should define simultaneity at every instant in terms of his instantaneous inertial rest frame, or whether he should calculate everything from the perspective of his original rest frame before he began accelerating, or what. There isn't a physical answer to your question any more than their would be to the question of whether the origin of an observer's spatial coordinate axes travels along with him when he accelerates, or stays put, or what.
 
Thanks, Jesse. It makes sense to me. I now see that I was adding a second temporal dimension along which spacetime would change, which is insane.
 
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