I Difference between the Shapiro Delay and time dilation?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter dsaun777
  • Start date Start date
dsaun777
Messages
296
Reaction score
39
I recently listened to The Origins Podcast with Lawrence Krauss and he had on the 94 year old physicist Irwin Shapiro. It was interesting and went into some of the details regarding the history of his work. In it he brings up how he first calculated what we now call the Shapiro Delay. It is a measure of light's deflection caused by a large mass such as the sun. It sounds very similar to time dilation. Does anyone here know the difference between the Shapiro Delay and time dilation and why it was only in 1964 that was discovered? It seems like a natural deduction from GR.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's more than just time dilation; it's measurably affected by the curvature of Schwarzschild spatial planes.

Why it wasn't thought of before is an imponderable. But there are a number of factors that may be relevant.

People tend to think in terms of tests you can do. To measure Shapiro delay you need to measure flight time, which depends on knowing the launch time of the light. The only ways I can think of doing it is radar (low power sets were developed in World War II), sending a space probe to the far side of the Sun (space exploration took off in the 1960s), or tracking pulsars (not discovered until the 1960s). It couldn't have been done much before it was. In fact, the radar set they tested it with was built in the early 60s, so may have stimulated research itself (people were looking for applications for it).

Also, I seem to recall that there was relatively little theoretical interest in GR between the 1920s and the 1960s, when there was a resurgence because new mathematical tools were brought to bear. So maybe there just wasn't much work in that field.
 
  • Like
Likes dsaun777 and Nugatory
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...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
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...
Back
Top