Confusion with time dialation.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of time dilation as it relates to satellites, specifically the International Space Station (ISS) and GPS satellites. Participants explore the effects of gravitational potential and velocity on time experienced by these satellites compared to clocks on Earth.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the differing claims regarding time dilation effects on satellites and the ISS, noting that both experience weaker gravitational pull and high velocities.
  • Another participant suggests that the difference in altitude could explain the varying time dilation effects, indicating that less gravitational potential speeds up time while higher speeds slow it down, leading to an offset.
  • A mathematical formulation of time dilation is provided, showing how velocity-based and gravitational time dilation can be combined, with specific equations presented to illustrate the relationship between orbital radius and clock rates.
  • It is noted that clocks on satellites with larger orbits tick faster than those at lower orbits, with the ISS being in a relatively low orbit where its clocks tick slower than those on the Earth's surface.
  • A participant acknowledges the clarity provided by another's explanation, indicating that they were close to understanding the concept but needed further elaboration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the overall effects of time dilation for the ISS versus GPS satellites, as different interpretations and calculations are presented. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the precise impact of altitude and velocity on time dilation.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about gravitational potential and velocity, as well as the specific conditions under which the time dilation effects are analyzed. The mathematical steps and their implications are not fully resolved.

MartinJH
Messages
72
Reaction score
2
Reading Brian Cox and Jeff Forshaw's book "Why does E=MC2". They mention that satellites speed up with time, but, then reading Wiki it says the crew of the ISS experience the slowing of time. Which one is correct? I'm slightly confused.
Both experience a weaker gravitational pull and high velocities.
I feel I have the answer but it's been some months since I read anything about this.
Could it be the overall difference in altitude and speed?
Many thankshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The velocity based time dilation combined with the gravitational time dilation can be written as:

[tex]\sqrt{1-\frac{v^2}{c^2}} * \sqrt{1-\frac{2GM}{rc^2}}[/tex]

Since the orbital velocity of a satellite is given by:

[tex]v = \sqrt{\frac{GM}{r}}[/tex]

then the first equation can be rewritten as:

[tex]\sqrt{1-\frac{GM}{rc^2}} * \sqrt{1-\frac{2GM}{rc^2}}[/tex]

It can be seen for increasing radius the time dilation reduces due to increased height and due to reduced orbital velocity. Clocks on satellites with large orbits tick faster than clocks on satellites at lower orbits. Clocks on the surface of the Earth are moving much slower than the required orbital velocity at that radius and so tick faster than clocks on satellites with very low orbits. The ISS has a relatively low orbit (its radius is approximately 1.05 times the radius of the Earth), so clocks on the ISS are indeed ticking slower than clocks on the surface of the Earth. The speed up of clocks with increasing radius means that once an orbital radius is larger than 3 times the Earth surface radius (the break even point) the clocks on board a satellite are ticking faster than a clock on the Earth surface. The GPS satellites have an orbital radius of about 4.1 times the radius of the Earth so they are ticking faster.

P.S. The above equations for the time dilation of an orbiting satellite can be fairly accurately approximated in this case by:

[tex]\sqrt{1-\frac{3GM}{rc^2}} or \left(1-\frac{3GM}{2rc^2}\right)[/tex]
 
Thank you, yuiop. You have hit the nail on the head.
Since I posted the question, a few hours ago, I have been pondering over it and knew their had to be a explanation. From reading your post it looks like I was touching on the reason but couldn't quite grasp it.

Thank you for your post also, Naty1.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 110 ·
4
Replies
110
Views
19K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K