I Does the Light's One/Two-Way Speed Distinction Mean Anything?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pony
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Speed
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the distinction between the one-way and two-way speed of light, emphasizing that the choice of synchronization in measuring time is a matter of convention rather than a reflection of physical reality. It argues that while individuals can choose their measuring devices and coordinate systems, this choice does not impact the underlying physics, which remains unmeasurable and abstract. The ability to synchronize clocks is presented as a trivial metaphysical freedom rather than a significant physical principle. Ultimately, the conversation concludes that these conventions do not alter physical properties but serve as convenient methods for description. The distinction is deemed neither particularly relevant nor indicative of true physical phenomena.
Pony
Messages
39
Reaction score
10
There is a trivial metaphysical freedom, that emerges from the fact that people living in a world must use their own measuring devices, that are part of that world.

E.g. people living in a flatland must use their own rulers to measure distance. If one half of their world is widened, they won't notice it if they go there, because they themselves and their rulers will widen too.
( In other words, there is a "true" physics and reality, and there is what they measure and these two differ. Also the former is not measurable, or affect their life in any way. Also the flatland people can choose to believe that half of their world is bigger but unmeasurable, if they want to. )

Now my question. Wiki says that
Albert Einstein chose a synchronization convention (see Einstein synchronization) that made the one-way speed equal to the two-way speed. The constancy of the one-way speed in any given inertial frame is the basis of his special theory of relativity, although all experimentally verifiable predictions of this theory do not depend on that convention.[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-way_speed_of_light
Is the ability to choose synchronizations is a relevant and interesting fact, or it is the same of the rather trivial metaphysical argument, that I wrote about above?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I recommend this video before asking that question.
 
If I understand what you are asking, one answer is this: It all seems academic and only for nerds until someone follows the theory through to develop a nuclear weapon.
 
Pony said:
Is the ability to choose synchronizations is a relevant and interesting fact,
Being able to choose clock synchronisation is one aspect of the fact that you are free to choose coordinates. If you were not free to choose coordinates you would have to provide some explanation of why your choice of "plane of constant time" was not a free choice, or abandon (or never develop, more likely) spacetime as a model of reality.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Pony
Pony said:
Also the former is not measurable, or affect their life in any way.
If it is not falsifiable, then it is not physics. However, this is not what is going on with the one-way speed of light. The one-way speed of light can be defined to be equal to the two-way speed and isotropic. This is not saying anything about a physical reality. It is just a conventient choice of coordinates. You could have chosen a different way to assign coordinates and the result would be the same. It is just a more convenient way of assigning the coordinates.

Similarly, you can choose to describe a rectangle with polar coordinates. It is an inconvenient choice though and Cartesian coordinates would probably have been better suited. Using polar coordinates would however not change the physical properties of the rectangle, just be a different way to describe the same thing.

Pony said:
If one half of their world is widened
As defined how? If it is not measurable it is not part of the physical reality of flatland. If you need to postulate that something is unmeasurable, then it has nothing to do with physics.
 
Pony said:
Is the ability to choose synchronizations is a relevant and interesting fact, or it is the same of the rather trivial metaphysical argument, that I wrote about above?
I would say neither. It is a convention. Neither particularly relevant nor is it a true or false physics. It is simply a convention like the proton’s charge being positive.
 
  • Like
Likes cianfa72, dextercioby, Ibix and 1 other person
I've been thinking some more about the Hawking - Penrose Singularity theorem and was wondering if you could help me gain a better understanding of the assumptions they made when they wrote it, in 1970. In Hawking's book, A Brief History of Time (chapter 3, page 25) he writes.... In 1965 I read about Penrose’s theorem that any body undergoing gravitational collapse must eventually form a singularity. I soon realized that if one reversed the direction of time in Penrose’s theorem, so that...

Similar threads

Replies
36
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
683
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
5K
Replies
47
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
Replies
146
Views
10K