I How Does Distance to Proxima Centauri Affect Simultaneous Events?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben S
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    distance
Ben S
Messages
7
Reaction score
4
TL;DR Summary
Explain this statement: "Proxima Centauri is approximately four light-years away. For any particular event on Earth, there is an eight-year span of events on Proxima Centauri that could count as simultaneous with it, depending on your reference frame."
Referring to this statement:
"Proxima Centauri is approximately four light-years away. For any particular event on Earth, there is an eight-year span of events on Proxima Centauri that could count as simultaneous with it, depending on your reference frame."

How does the distance between Earth and Proxima Centauri (~4 light-years) affect the span of time of simultaneous events on Proxima Centauri?


This statement is from Sean Carroll's book- The Biggest Ideas in the Universe (Space, Time, and Motion).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In order for there to exist a frame where two events are simultaneous, they must not be within each other's light cones. For a given event on Earth, consider what the light cone of that event looks like, particularly around a distance 4 ly away from Earth.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
Ben S said:
How does the distance between Earth and Proxima Centauri (~4 light-years) affect the span of time of simultaneous events on Proxima Centauri?
Anything you have seen happening is definitely in your past. Any event where people see something you do now is definitely in your future. For the Centauri system, there's an eight year gap between a little green man waving at you and him being able to see you react. If "now" is when you react, "now on Proxima" must lie somewhere in those eight years.

In Newtonian physics we simply assert that now is now and everybody agrees what that means. Part of the development of relativity was discovering that this isn't correct - you can pick literally any time in that eight year gap and call it "now on Proxima". There are no physical consequences because the fact that nothing can travel faster than light means that you can't react to something that's happening "now" anyway.

So as long as you keep your definition of "now" out of your definite past (formally called your causal past) and definite future (causal future) then you're pretty much free to define it. Which is the point Carroll is making.

Note that he doesn't say "the span of time of simultaneous events". He just says that's the span of time from which you get to pick a moment to call now.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
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...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
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...
Back
Top