I How does Einstein define simultaneity in his 1905 paper?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aufbauwerk 2045
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Time
Click For Summary
Einstein's 1905 paper, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," introduces key concepts of relativity, particularly the definition of simultaneity through the synchronization of clocks. He posits that two clocks, A and B, can only indicate time for events in their immediate vicinity, necessitating a common time definition based on the speed of light. This synchronization is established by ensuring the time taken for light to travel between the two clocks is equal in both directions. The discussion emphasizes the distinction between "proper time," measured by a single clock, and "coordinate time," which assigns labels to events. Overall, the paper lays foundational ideas for understanding time and simultaneity in the context of relativity.
  • #61
Aufbauwerk 2045,

Also, in OEMB Section 1 when Einstein talks about an observer "in the neighborhood" of the clock, or the clock "in the neighborhood" of the event, he's only minimizing the light travel time (delay) from event to clock, and/or clock to observer('s eyes). An observer (A) at a train station with clock in hand, knows the train arrived at 7pm ... little hand at 7 and train at station. If an observer (B) 20 light seconds away (say also at rest with the train station) awaits light signals from that distant event, the received light image shows the clock arrived at the station at 7, by the clock on the wrist of he at the station. However, this distant observer's own clock then reads 7:00:20, not 7 ... because light takes 20 sec to traverse a 20 light-sec separation. If that observer (B) used his own clock to define the event, he'd say the train arrived at 20 sec after 7. So this is what Einstein is pointing out in Section 1, when he talks about "in the neighborhood of". As stated in the thread already, he's defining the situation whereby the light's flight time from event to clock, or clock to eyes, is "negligible enough for all intents and purposes". As such, your own clock's time readout that you see "is essentially" the time the event occurred (train at station). The observer, his clock, and the event, are essentially in-the-same-place-at-the-same-time.

Best Regards,
GrayGhost
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Sorry, I have a type-O correction in my prior ...

I wrote ... ", the received light image shows the clock arrived at the station at 7, by the clock on the wrist of he at the station."

I should have written ... ", the received light image shows the train arrived at the station at 7, by the clock on the wrist of he at the station."

The paper reference being ... http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Best Regards,
GrayGhost
 
  • #63
EDoMb Section 1 is called Definition of Simultaneity.

It does not define simultaneity of separated clocks. It defines synchrony of separated clocks.

EDoMB Section 2, in connection with "discovered length" makes reference to "definite time." Definite time is simultaneity at separate locations, the endpoints of a rigid body.

Section 2 ultimately uses synchrony and not simultaneity for discovered length, synchrony having been plausibly defined in Section 1.

Einstein's article in The 14th Encyclopedia Britannica ( title: Space-Time ) roughly 1930, says "there is no such thing as absolute simultaneity."

Algebraically, simultaneity at separate locations A and B is: tA = tB. No such equation appears in EDoMB and is very hard to find anywhere on the web. It is not in the EB article.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 114 ·
4
Replies
114
Views
9K