I Distance between two light pulses

member 743765
If a source emits a light pulse then waited one second and sent another pulse does the distance between the two pulses remain constant ? If yes is that mean their relative speed is zero? But why when we use lorentz transformation their relative speeds gives us zero over zero but if they travel in opposite directions their relative speed is c which agrees with special relativity?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
phyahmad said:
If a source emits a light pulse then waited one second and sent another pulse does the distance between the two pulses remain constant ?
Yes, assuming they're going in the same direction.
phyahmad said:
If yes is that mean their relative speed is zero?
No. It means that the difference in their coordinate velocities in your chosen frame is zero, which means that it will be zero in all frames. I usually call this quantity "closing rate" or "separation rate", although I don't think there's a universally accepted term.

The relative velocity of two objects is the velocity measured by one of the other in the rest frame of the first one. Light does not have a rest frame, so "velocity relative to light" isn't defined.

Note that relative velocity and separation rate are always equal in Newtonian physics, but not relativity.
phyahmad said:
But why when we use lorentz transformation their relative speeds gives us zero over zero but if they travel in opposite directions their relative speed is c which agrees with special relativity?
Lorentz transforms to a frame with speed ##v=\pm c## are not defined. Thus derived formulae such as the velocity transform (which is what I think you are using here) are not valid. That's why you get contradictory answers when you plug in ##+c## and ##-c##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Dale and member 743765
phyahmad said:
But why when we use lorentz transformation their relative speeds gives us zero over zero but if they travel in opposite directions their relative speed is c which agrees with special relativity?
It should be undefined regardless of the direction. Light doesn’t have an inertial rest frame. You may want to check your math with the Lorentz transform for the opposite direction case
 
  • Like
Likes member 743765
Ibix said:
Yes, assuming they're going in the same direction.
And that we are in flat spacetime (i.e., no gravitating masses are present) and are using an inertial frame.
 
phyahmad said:
But why when we use lorentz transformation their relative speeds gives us zero over zero but if they travel in opposite directions their relative speed is c which agrees with special relativity?
To follow up on this. The Lorentz transform to an inertial frame moving at velocity ##v## with respect to the unprimed inertial frame is $$ct'=\frac{c t- v x/c}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}$$$$x'=\frac{x-vt}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}$$ For an object traveling at velocity ##u## in the unprimed frame we get ##x=ut## which gives $$ct'=\frac{c t- v u t/c}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}$$$$x'=\frac{u t-vt}{\sqrt{1-v^2/c^2}}$$

So, for the "perspective of light" we would have ##v=c## which gives $$ct'=\frac{c t- u t}{\sqrt{1-c^2/c^2}}=\frac{c t- u t}{0}=undefined$$$$x'=\frac{u t-ct}{\sqrt{1-c^2/c^2}}=\frac{u t-ct}{0}=undefined$$ Regardless of ##u##
 
  • Like
Likes PeroK and member 743765
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top