Gravity & Time: Is Time Different at 17000 MPH?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mr Peanut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity Time
Mr Peanut
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Say I'm near the Earth and traveling at 17000 mile per hour. Relative to my local time, is it earlier or later on earth? Or is it the same time?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Mr Peanut said:
Say I'm near the Earth and traveling at 17000 mile per hour. Relative to my local time, is it earlier or later on earth? Or is it the same time?

Hi Mr Peanut! :smile:

("earlier" or "later" is irrelevant ; the question is whether clocks are slower or faster)

Special relativity says that you measure an Earth clock as going slow, and we on Earth measure your clock as going equally slow.

General relativity adds that, whatever your speed, your clock will be slightly faster than it would otherwise be, because of the weaker gravity where you are.
 
Mr Peanut said:
Say I'm near the Earth and traveling at 17000 mile per hour. Relative to my local time, is it earlier or later on earth? Or is it the same time?

According to SRT your satellite onboard clock will run more slowly than an earthbound clock. I believe that this slowing down exceeds the difference in clock rates attributable to the earthbound clock's location deeper in the Earth's gravitational field. This being the case, the net result would be that the satellite clock gradually loses time compared to the earthbound clock. I think that this may have been experimentally verified. Dr. Neil Ashby, University of Colorado, would be an authority. He has done extensive GRT analysis for the Global Positioning folks.
 
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(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top