General Relativity Problem (frames of reference)

AI Thread Summary
A clock moving at 3/5 the speed of light reads 12:00 as it passes an observer and is calculated to be 3/5 light hours away when it reads 1:00. The initial calculation of distance used Lorentz contraction but incorrectly expressed the result in terms of speed. After clarification, it was determined that the correct distance, accounting for time dilation, is actually 3/4 light hours. This shows that the moving clock has traveled farther than initially estimated due to relativistic effects. The reasoning aligns with the principles of general relativity regarding frames of reference.
RJLiberator
Gold Member
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
63

Homework Statement


A clock moving at v = (3/5)c reads 12:00 as it passes us in our frame of reference, how far away will it be (in light hours) when it reads 1:00.

Homework Equations


I denote a prime to mean the reference frame of the clock at rest. I use regular lettering to denote 'our' frame of reference.

c = speed of light

t' = t/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
L' = L*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

L = v*t

The Attempt at a Solution



Alright, I use Lorentz contraction to solve this problem.

First I find the length L using v and t = 1 hr. L = (3/5)c*1 hr = (3/5)c light hours.
Now, I use Lorentz contraction to find L'
L' = (3/5)c*sqrt(1-9/25)
L' = 12c/25
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RJLiberator said:

Homework Statement


A clock moving at v = (3/5)c reads 12:00 as it passes us in our frame of reference, how far away will it be (in light hours) when it reads 1:00.

Homework Equations


I denote a prime to mean the reference frame of the clock at rest. I use regular lettering to denote 'our' frame of reference.

c = speed of light

t' = t/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
L' = L*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)

L = v*t

The Attempt at a Solution



Alright, I use Lorentz contraction to solve this problem.

First I find the length L using v and t = 1 hr. L = (3/5)c*1 hr = (3/5)c light hours.
Now, I use Lorentz contraction to find L'
L' = (3/5)c*sqrt(1-9/25)
L' = 12c/25
First of all, 12c/25 has units of speed, not distance.

When one hour elapses in "our" frame of reference, the clock has traveled 3/5 light⋅hour (in our frame).

From "our" point of view the moving clock runs slower than normal, so when the clock reads 1:00, it will have traveled farther than 3/5light⋅hours.
 
  • Like
Likes RJLiberator
Thank you for your assistance SammyS.

I see the difference now in light hours. When saying 12c/25, that is incorrect as it is a speed. I should have said 12/25 light hours. Noted.

In our FOR it is clear that the clock traveled a distance of 3/5 light hours.
So I can use time dilation here to see:

t' = \frac{1hr} {\sqrt{1-\frac{\frac{9c^2} {25}} {c^2}}}
t' = 1.25 hr

Therefore, we say the distance will be 1.25 hr * 3c/5 = 3/4 light hours.

3/4 light hours > 3/5 light hours

Is that now a correct line of reasoning?
 
RJLiberator said:
Thank you for your assistance SammyS.

I see the difference now in light hours. When saying 12c/25, that is incorrect as it is a speed. I should have said 12/25 light hours. Noted.

In our FOR it is clear that the clock traveled a distance of 3/5 light hours.
So I can use time dilation here to see:

t' = \frac{1hr} {\sqrt{1-\frac{\frac{9c^2} {25}} {c^2}}}
t' = 1.25 hr

Therefore, we say the distance will be 1.25 hr * 3c/5 = 3/4 light hours.

3/4 light hours > 3/5 light hours

Is that now a correct line of reasoning?
Yes. That's what I get.
 
  • Like
Likes RJLiberator
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top