Gravitational Time Dilation Problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the gravitational time dilation problem, specifically calculating the difference in lifespan for a person living 75 years at a height of 3.1 km versus at sea level. Using the equations for time dilation, the participant derived that the person would have lived approximately 74.99 years at sea level. The confusion arose from the assumption that time at sea level should be longer, but the calculations confirmed that the individual would indeed have lived 0.01 years longer at sea level due to the effects of gravitational time dilation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational time dilation principles
  • Familiarity with general relativity equations
  • Basic knowledge of physics constants such as G (gravitational constant) and c (speed of light)
  • Ability to manipulate algebraic equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the implications of gravitational time dilation in different gravitational fields
  • Learn more about the derivation and application of the Schwarzschild metric
  • Explore the effects of altitude on time perception using real-world examples
  • Investigate the relationship between mass, gravity, and time as described in Einstein's theory of relativity
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching general relativity, and anyone interested in the practical applications of time dilation in astrophysics.

J_M_R
Messages
20
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A person lived 75 years in a city located 3.1km above sea level. How much longer could they have lived at sea level? (Times are measured by an observer at infinite distance).

Homework Equations



tr/t∞ = {1 - [ (2GM) / (r(c^2)) ]}^(1/2)

Rc (Radius at city) = Rearth + 3.1km

∴ t(sea-level)/t∞ = {1 - [ (2GMe) / (Rearth(c^2)) ]}^(1/2)

and ∴ t(city)/t∞ = {1 - [ (2GMe) / (Rc(c^2)) ]}^(1/2)

The Attempt at a Solution



t(sea-level) / {1 - [ (2GMe) / (Rearth(c^2)) ]}^(1/2) ≈ t(city) / {1 - [ (2GMe) / (Rc(c^2)) ]}^(1/2)

Having made the the two t∞ equal to each other.

Knowing t(city) = 75 years this gave t(sea-level) as 74.99 years.

Where have I gone wrong as shouldn't t(sea-level) be longer?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
J_M_R said:
Where have I gone wrong as shouldn't t(sea-level) be longer?

What gives you that idea?
 
PeroK said:
What gives you that idea?

I was just using the fact that the question says "How much longer could they have lived at sea level?" so assumed t(sea-level) should therefore be longer?
 
J_M_R said:
I was just using the fact that the question says "How much longer could they have lived at sea level?" so assumed t(sea-level) should therefore be longer?
Ask yourself, which of the two has longer until his 76th birthday according to your calculations.
 
Bandersnatch said:
Ask yourself, which of the two has longer until his 76th birthday according to your calculations.
Ah, so the t(sea-level) has longer until his 76th birthday so the person could have lived 0.01 years longer at sea level according to my calculations?
 
You got it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: J_M_R
Bandersnatch said:
You got it.
Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K