Events in Relativity: Can Simultaneous Occurrences Exist?

In summary: A and B at the same time. In fact, there would be two completely different events that would each have a different coordinate representation in spacetime.Thanks for the comment, but, does not a quantum of energy as a wave enter the two different spatial locations of the two slits in the double-slit experiment as a single event ?No. There are two separate events, each of which has an amplitude associated with it. (At least, that's true if "event" is defined in the standard way. See my next post for a comment about that.)
  • #1
Salman2
95
0
I have a question about the concept of an 'event' in relativity theory.

Can an 'event' occur simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ? For example, suppose two observers at locations A and B not far separated. Can they both experience the same 'event' at the same moment in time ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Salman2 said:
Can an 'event' occur simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ?

No. The definition of an event is a single point in spacetime--that means a single spatial location at a single instant of time.
 
  • #3
Note that simultaneity is frame dependent, it has no absolute meaning. So to continue, we must pick some frame ##O## and talk about simultaneous events with respect to ##O##. Given that, certainly two events can have different spatial locations but the same time as represented in ##O## - for example the observer associated with ##O## might see two bombs go off at the same time but at two different locations in space. However, it makes no sense to say a single event can have two different spatial locations as represented in ##O## because the event gets a unique coordinate representation in ##O##.
 
  • #4
WannabeNewton said:
.. it makes no sense to say a single event can have two different spatial locations as represented in ##O##
Thanks for the comment, but, does not a quantum of energy as a wave enter the two different spatial locations of the two slits in the double-slit experiment as a single event ?

Edit: Suppose we assume the two slits are in the frame of reference O of the quantum wave, and not from the frame of the structure into which the slits are cut from.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
No. The definition of an event is a single point in spacetime--that means a single spatial location at a single instant of time.
OK thanks.

But, just asking...how would relativity theory be modified if an event was defined as: an event is defined as a phenomenon that occurs simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ?
 
  • #6
Salman2 said:
OK thanks.

But, just asking...how would relativity theory be modified if an event was defined as: an event is defined as a phenomenon that occurs simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ?
Add another time dimension. There was a theory proposed once that had 3 timelike and 3 spacelike dimensions and it explains the double-slit very well. But it is otherwise intolerably weird.
 
  • #7
Salman2 said:
Thanks for the comment, but, does not a quantum of energy as a wave enter the two different spatial locations of the two slits in the double-slit experiment as a single event ?
I am not sure about how events work in quantum theory but the notion of an event, as represented in an observer's frame, only makes sense when the observer actually makes a measurement of the position and time of the event. For the double-slit experiment, a measurement of position would cause the state vector to take on a definite eigenstate of the position operator although I don't know if this has the same meaning as making a measurement in special relativity so don't take my word for it.
 
  • #8
Salman2 said:
does not a quantum of energy as a wave enter the two different spatial locations of the two slits in the double-slit experiment as a single event ?

No. There are two separate events, each of which has an amplitude associated with it. (At least, that's true if "event" is defined in the standard way. See my next post for a comment about that.)
 
  • #9
Salman2 said:
how would relativity theory be modified if an event was defined as: an event is defined as a phenomenon that occurs simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ?

I don't see how this modifies the theory of relativity; it just modifies the definition of an English word, "event". Relativity as a theory is not done in English; it is done in math. Redefining the word "event" doesn't change the math at all. In the math, you still have two spatial locations at some instant of time.
 
  • #10
Salman2 said:
OK thanks.

But, just asking...how would relativity theory be modified if an event was defined as: an event is defined as a phenomenon that occurs simultaneously at two spatial locations, A & B where (A=x1,y1,z1, B=x2,y2,z2), AT THE SAME MOMENT IN TIME ?

Google around for Einstein's thought experiment involving the train and the relativity of simultaneity (hereis one reasonable-looking link high in Google's page rank).

If you think through that example you'll see that there's no way of defining an event, or anything else for that matter, in terms of things that happen at the same moment in time but at different spatial locations. There cannot be any generally agreed-upon definition of "at the same moment of time".
 
  • #11
Mentz114 said:
Add another time dimension. There was a theory proposed once that had 3 timelike and 3 spacelike dimensions and it explains the double-slit very well. But it is otherwise intolerably weird.
Thanks. Do you have a reference for a publication on this theory ?
 

1. What is relativity and how does it relate to events?

Relativity is a theory developed by Albert Einstein that explains the relationship between space and time. It states that the laws of physics are the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion. Events are things that happen at a specific location and time, and relativity helps us understand how these events are perceived by different observers.

2. Why is it important to consider simultaneity in relativity?

In classical mechanics, events are considered to be simultaneous if they occur at the same time in a single reference frame. However, in relativity, the concept of simultaneity is relative and can differ between observers in different frames of reference. This is important to consider because it affects our understanding of cause and effect relationships between events.

3. Can simultaneous occurrences truly exist in relativity?

In relativity, there is no absolute notion of simultaneity, so it is not possible for two events to be considered truly simultaneous. However, events can be considered simultaneous from the perspective of a specific observer in a specific frame of reference. This is known as local simultaneity.

4. How does the theory of relativity challenge our understanding of time?

Relativity challenges our traditional understanding of time as a constant and absolute quantity. It shows that time is actually relative and can be affected by factors such as motion and gravity. This means that time can pass at different rates for different observers, and events that are simultaneous for one observer may not be simultaneous for another.

5. What are some real-life examples of the relativity of simultaneity?

One example is the famous "twin paradox," where one twin travels at high speeds in space while the other stays on Earth. When the traveling twin returns, they have aged less than their twin on Earth due to time dilation. This is because their relative motion causes time to pass differently for each twin. Another example is the synchronization of clocks on different GPS satellites, which must take into account the effects of relativity to accurately measure time and location on Earth.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
805
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
584
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
671
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
784
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
89
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
5
Replies
144
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Back
Top