Constant velocity vs accelerating source

brightonb
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Would a signal sent from a transmitter, traveling at constant velocity toward an observer, arrive at the same time if it were accelerating toward that observer? The signals are sent at the same relative distance from the observer. Would the result be the same if the transmitters were receding from the observer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
brightonb said:
Would a signal sent from a transmitter, traveling at constant velocity toward an observer, arrive at the same time if it were accelerating toward that observer? The signals are sent at the same relative distance from the observer. Would the result be the same if the transmitters were receding from the observer?

Same proper distance from the recipient, yes. Which means at the same distance distance according to the recipient.

If you doing all the relative distances according to the transmitter, then no.

cheers,

neopolitan
 
brightonb, i don't think there would be a difference because the speed at which light travels (c) is constant and does not depend on the motion of the observer as long as the light is emitted at the same distance from the transmitter in both cases.
 
Would a signal sent from a transmitter, traveling at constant velocity toward an observer,

You have constrained you inquiry by the phrase "traveling at constant velocity" so of course any two signals traveling at the same constant velocity would arrive at the same time from the same distance.

I think your real question is
Would a signal sent from a transmitter arrive at the same time if it were sent from the same distance approaching as receding from the observer?

and the answer is "yes" because the speed of electromagnetic radiation (say, light) is independent of the speed of the source or the observer.
 
Naty1 said:
You have constrained you inquiry by the phrase "traveling at constant velocity" so of course any two signals traveling at the same constant velocity would arrive at the same time from the same distance.

I think your real question is

and the answer is "yes" because the speed of electromagnetic radiation (say, light) is independent of the speed of the source or the observer.

Only one source is moving at constant velocity, the other is accelerating but they both transmit a signal from the same location. e.g., the c.v. source could be moving at 100 mph while the accel source could be at 1000 mph at the transmission time.
 
brightonb said:
Only one source is moving at constant velocity, the other is accelerating but they both transmit a signal from the same location. e.g., the c.v. source could be moving at 100 mph while the accel source could be at 1000 mph at the transmission time.
Both signals will have the same velocity. The state of motion (velocity, acceleration, etc) of the emitter is irrelevant.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
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...
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