Gravitational Time Dilation: A Layman's Explanation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around gravitational time dilation and its relationship with acceleration in a rocket. Participants explore the effects of gravitational fields and relativistic effects on the synchronization of clocks placed at different positions within an accelerating rocket. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and conceptual clarifications regarding time and length contraction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that in an accelerating rocket, the clock at the top would experience time more quickly than the one at the bottom due to changing simultaneity as perceived from different frames of reference.
  • Others argue that this effect is only significant in extreme conditions, such as being near a black hole, and that for a normal rocket, the clocks would not show a noticeable discrepancy when accounting for acceleration.
  • A participant explains that the delay in signal reception between the two clocks is influenced by the rocket's acceleration, leading to a difference in perceived time between the clocks.
  • Another viewpoint emphasizes that while special relativity can explain the clock readings in an accelerating rocket, the equivalence principle suggests similar observations in a gravitational field, leading to the conclusion that the lower clock ticks slower than the upper clock.
  • One participant introduces the concept of Lorentz contraction, stating that the rear of the rocket moves slightly faster than the front, which affects the time dilation experienced by the clocks.
  • Another contribution details the relationship between events at the two clocks, highlighting how simultaneity differs between frames and contributes to the time discrepancy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the conditions under which gravitational time dilation and acceleration affect clock synchronization. There is no consensus on the specifics of how these effects manifest in a typical rocket scenario, indicating ongoing debate and exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion involves complex interactions between acceleration, gravitational effects, and the principles of relativity, which may not be fully resolved in their explanations. The assumptions about the scale of the rocket and the depth of gravitational influence are also acknowledged as potentially limiting factors in their reasoning.

Hihello
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I think I have a layman's understanding of time and length contraction. However, I don't really understand gravitational time delay or distance contraction. If we were to put two clocks at the front and end of a rocket, the one on the top would experience time more quickly than would the one on the bottom. Why?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't think that's the case unless the ship is in a really deep gravity well, basically a black hole, and the ship is the process of being 'spaghettified' by it.
If the ship is traveling close to light speed relative to a distant observer, THEY would notice time dilation for the ship's clock(s).
A clock aboard the ship would appear to them to run slower than their own clock, (whether it's at the front of the ship or at the back).
The distant observer would witness the same thing if the ship is in a very deep gravity well, (although not yet deep enough in for tidal forces to be ripping it apart, - that's the spaghettification bit).
Assuming the ship is of a normal scale, a person inside it could go to one end of it to read a clock, then go to the other end and read the other clock and taking account of the time it takes to walk, they would not notice any discrepancy.
 
Last edited:
Hihello said:
I think I have a layman's understanding of time and length contraction. However, I don't really understand gravitational time delay or distance contraction. If we were to put two clocks at the front and end of a rocket, the one on the top would experience time more quickly than would the one on the bottom. Why?
As the rocket accelerates, the notion of simultaneity (as judged from an instantaneous co-moving inertial frame) is changing. Even if the two clocks start synchronized and follow identical acceleration profiles (as judged from some inertial frame), neither will remain synchronized with the other according to any of the succession of tangent frames in which they are momentarily at rest.
 
Hihello said:
If we were to put two clocks at the front and end of a rocket, the one on the top would experience time more quickly than would the one on the bottom. Why?

Imagine that the clock at the tail of the rocket is a strobe light, flashing once per second according to someone sitting next to it on the rocket. How much time passes between the arrival of each flash at the nose of the rocket? If the rocket is accelerating, each flash has to travel slightly farther than its predecessor, so there will be more than one second between each arrival.

Once you understand this phenomenon clearly, the equivalence principle will get you to gravitational time dilation.
 
Last edited:
Hihello said:
I think I have a layman's understanding of time and length contraction. However, I don't really understand gravitational time delay or distance contraction. If we were to put two clocks at the front and end of a rocket, the one on the top would experience time more quickly than would the one on the bottom. Why?
It sounds as if you received a confused explanation... I'll try to clarify it.

1. For the effect of an accelerating rocket on clock readings, only special relativity is required if it is far from gravitational influences.
If we neglect length contraction* (and at first, with acceleration from v=0, that is very accurate) then the clocks are going at the same rate, according to measurements with a standard inertial reference system.
Inside the rocket, the signals form the rear clock that reach the front clock will be more and more delayed, and similarly the signals from the front clock that reach the rear clock will be less and less delayed. In other words, the frequency of the rear clock's second indicator that is received at the front clock will be less than 1 Hz.

* If in addition we account for length contraction, you may understand that due too the slightly bigger acceleration, the rear clock is always moving very slightly faster than the front clock, and thus it will even tick very slightly slower than the front clock according to measurements with a standard inertial reference system.

2. According to the equivalence principle, the observations should be the same inside a rocket that is resting on the ground in the Earth's gravitational field (with the same accelerometer readings as in the accelerating rocket).
Simplifying for the case of the Earth in rest, the delay time between the clocks is constant. Nevertheless the same frequency difference will be observed as in an accelerating rocket. Einstein concluded* that in a gravitational field the bottom clock is ticking slower than the top clock.

* See p.197, 198 of the English translation of the 1916 paper, here: http://web.archive.org/web/20060829045130/http://www.Alberteinstein.info/gallery/gtext3.html
 
I wrote a post about this a long time ago, but I don't know what the URL is. There are two different effects at work at the same time in time dilation on board an accelerating rocket:
  1. From the point of view of the "launch" frame (the frame where the rocket is originally at rest), the length of the rocket contracts continuously (Lorentz contraction). Because of this length contraction, the rear of the rocket is always moving slightly faster than the front of the rocket. That means that relativistic time dilation affects the rear slightly more than the front. So in the launch frame, the rear clock runs a little slower than the front clock.
  2. Because of relativity of simultaneity, even if the front and rear clocks were synchronized in the "launch" frame, they would NOT be synchronized in the instantaneous rest frame of the rocket.
Let's identify three different events:
  1. e_1 = the event at the rear clock when it shows time T_{rear}
  2. e_2 = the event at the front clock that is simultaneous with e_1, according to the "launch" frame. Let T_{front, 1} be the time on the front clock at this event.
  3. e_3 = the event at the front clock that is simultaneous with e_1, according to the instantaneous rest frame of the rocket. Let T_{front, 2} be the time on the front clock at this event.
So in the rocket frame, the discrepancy between the front and rear clocks is given by:

\delta T = \delta T_1 + \delta T_2

where \delta T_1 = T_{front, 1} - T_{rear} and \delta T_2 = T_{front,2} - T_{front, 1}

delta T_1 is due to length contraction, while \delta T_2 is due to relativity of simultaneity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
7K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K