Does Defining a Four-Dimensional Velocity Vector Make Sense for Time Dilation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NanakiXIII
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant Sr
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Ask a follow-up in this thread, or start your own.
2 replies · 2K views
NanakiXIII
Messages
391
Reaction score
0
When looking at time dilation, I once came across a piece (I don't remember where) that said you could view time dilation as follows. Everything moves through four-dimensional spacetime at a constant velocity c. Something stationary is only moving in the time dimension. Something that has a velocity v in a spatial direction, however, cannot move at velocity c in the time dimension since its total velocity would change. Thus its velocity in the time dimension is decreased, hence time dilation.

I thought that was a nice thought, but I never came across anything that verified that it makes any sense. Today I was prompted to consider this statement a bit more quantitatively. It works if you take the vector (my reference frame being S and there being some reference frame S' with spatial velocity v with respect to S)

[tex]r_4 = (c t', x, y, z) = (\frac{c}{\gamma} t, x, y, z)[/tex]

so that

[tex]v_4 = \.{r}_4 = (\frac{c}{\gamma}, \.{x}, \.{y}, \.{z})[/tex].

The length of this vector is c, as per

[tex]v_4 \cdot v_4 = c^2 (1 - \frac{v^2}{c^2}) + v^2 = c^2[/tex].

So, defining this vector things might make sense. What I'm wondering, however, is how much sense it makes to define this vector. It takes the spatial co-ordinates from S and the time co-ordinate from S', which seems odd. Does differentiating ct' make any sense if you want the velocity in the time dimension?

I couldn't find anything about this and I have no idea what it would be called, which makes searching for it a bit difficult. It sounds somewhat like a layman's explanation and I'm fairly sure I came across this in a very much simplified treatment of Special Relativity, but I'd like to hear what anyone has to comment on it, whether it has any merit.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Brian Greene is the one who I've seem summarizing relativity in terms of the "everything travels at c through spacetime" idea, and I quoted the math he uses to justify this in post #3 here.