I General relativity question: Gravity clock

logicalmorality
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
Would a gravity powered clock increase or decrease speed? For example an hourglass.
Would a gravity powered clock increase or decrease speed? Take an hourglass. It should increase speed as gravity increases because it's powered by gravity... But it should also decrease speed because of general relativity...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you call a ”gravity powered clock” is not a clock in the sense of relativity. It presumes a particular gravitational field to convert a measurement into a corresponding time.
 
There can be competing effects. In fact, you can easily stop an hour glass from working at all by letting it be in free fall.

Assuming you mean "an hour glass at fixed altitude", it's rate decreases compared to an atomic clock colocated with it as you increase in altitude. This is because an hourglass (or pendulum clock) must be recalibrated for the local gravitational field strength.

Independent of that, all clocks in a gravitational field run slightly slow compared to clocks at infinity. So once you've recalibrated your hourglass to match a co-located atomic clock, it'll still be running slightly slow compared to a clock at infinity.

Essentially, the problem is, as Orodruin just said, that such "gravity powered" clocks are not reliable clocks if they are moved to different gravitational field strengths.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale and PeroK
logicalmorality said:
Take an hourglass. It should increase speed as gravity increases because it's powered by gravity... But it should also decrease speed because of general relativity...
Your reasoning here is faulty. You can't do physics by waving your hands and stringing words together. You need to use the math of the theory to make predictions and then compare those predictions with what is actually observed. As long as there is a consistent mathematical model of the scenario that makes predictions that match what we observe, it doesn't matter that that model does not match whatever vague intuitive sense you have of what "looks right".

Also, you are making a simple and common but fundamental error: "gravity" in GR is not just one thing. An hourglass with greater "gravity" in the sense of "acceleration due to gravity" will run out faster, as seen by an observer right next to it, if we just take that one effect into account. But "gravity" in the sense of gravitational time dilation is different from "acceleration due to gravity", and deals with what the hourglass's behavior looks like to an observer who is not right next to it. There is nothing that requires what those two different observers observe to be the same.

Further, you cannot make a blanket statement that greater "acceleration due to gravity" always corresponds to greater gravitational time dilation. That is false as a general statement.
 
  • Like
Likes Ibix and PeroK
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
301
Replies
23
Views
2K
Back
Top