DeBroglie and Time Dilation Paradox

DuckAmuck
Messages
238
Reaction score
40
I need someone to resolve this paradox for me.

Before I start, here are the basic ideas:
Okay, so every moving particle has a DeBroglie wavelength: E=hc/\lambda.
This also means that each particle has a frequency: E=hf
So it also has a period: E=h/\tau
So any given mass has a DeBroglie period of \tau=h/mc^2

Consider the train problem with the light clock. The guy on the train sees the light clock ticking normally. Now an outside observer sees the train moving and thus will see the light clock ticking slower. This is due to time dilation: t' = t\gamma.

Okay, so here is the paradox: Now imagine you have an electron on the train instead of the light clock and you are monitoring it's DeBroglie period. Now since it is a time period, it should appear to increase in duration to the observer outside of the train. This cannot happen however, because if the time period increase, the frequency would decrease meaning the energy would decrease. A moving particle must have more energy than it does at rest.

What is the deal here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If we talk use the example of photons (visible reigion) instead of electrons (since both behave as waves) we would observe a shift towards the red end of the spectrum- the doppler shift. So this leads to another question; is the energy of red-shifted light lower than it would be (if observed at rest relative to the source) because it appears to have a lower frequency?
 
DuckAmuck said:
Okay, so here is the paradox: Now imagine you have an electron on the train instead of the light clock and you are monitoring it's DeBroglie period. Now since it is a time period, it should appear to increase in duration to the observer outside of the train. This cannot happen however, because if the time period increase, the frequency would decrease meaning the energy would decrease. A moving particle must have more energy than it does at rest.

What is the deal here?

As usual with relativity, you need to consider the whole picture, not just one part of it.

The phase of the de Broglie wave with energy E and momentum p (ignoring unit conversion constants of hbar) is given by the integral of (E dt - p.dx), which for constant velocity can be rewritten as

phase = E (1-v2/c2) t.

If the energy in the rest frame is E0 = mc2 then the increased energy E of the moving object is given by

E = E0/sqrt(1-v2/c2).

Substituting for E in the previous expression, this gives:

phase = E0 sqrt(1-v2/c2) t

From this, you can see that when the space-like phase change due to momentum is taken into account, the rate of change of phase with time does indeed decrease with the time dilation factor, as previously mentioned, but the energy increases by the same factor.
 
Here is a good page to start learning the four-vector de Broglie relation which unifies the usual three-vector de Broglie relation and Planck's relation.

http://physics.nmt.edu/~raymond/classes/ph13xbook/node73.html

Let's take the example of an electron. Given the four-momentum p = (E/c,px,py,pz) and the wave-four-vector k = (f/c,kx,ky,kz) where E is the total energy of the electron, px is the x component of the electron's momentum, f is the (temporal) frequency and kx is the wavenumber (spatial frequency). The four-vector formulaiton of the DeBroglie relation is:
p = hk

So, for an electron at rest
p = (2.7E-22,0,0,0) N s
k = p/h = (4.1E11,0,0,0) m-1
f = 1.2E20 Hz

Boosting to the frame where the electron is moving at 0.6 c in the x' direction.
p = (3.4E-22,2.0E-22,0,0) N s
k = p/h = (5.2E11,3.1E11,0,0) m-1
f = 1.5E20 Hz

So we see that the full formulation of the DeBroglie relation correctly predicts the higher frequency in the frame where it has higher energy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
54
Views
3K
Replies
88
Views
7K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
58
Views
4K
Replies
45
Views
5K
Replies
9
Views
360
Replies
16
Views
2K
Back
Top