How Ebeb's Diagram Reveals Time Dilation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

This thread discusses the implications of Ebeb's diagram in relation to time dilation, focusing on the behavior of light clocks in different reference frames. Participants explore the relationships between time measurements, light travel distances, and the effects of special relativity, including time dilation and length contraction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes how, in their view, time dilation can be observed through the differing time measurements of light traveling in different frames, suggesting that the moving clock ticks slower while still counting the same number of ticks.
  • Another participant questions the relationship between two diagrams presented, indicating that they may not be related and expressing confusion over the application of Ockham's Razor in this context.
  • Some participants clarify that the diagrams represent different aspects of the scenario, with one noting that the light paths should be represented as points rather than arrows in a snapshot of the clocks' positions.
  • One participant attempts to explain their diagram as a non-relativistic representation, asserting that it illustrates the time dilation effect, but others challenge the consistency of this approach with the principles of relativity.
  • Another participant emphasizes that time dilation arises from the differing perceptions of time in various frames, particularly highlighting the need for consistency in how light behaves across those frames.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the diagrams and their implications for understanding time dilation. There is no consensus on the relationship between the diagrams or the correctness of the claims made regarding light travel and time measurement.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note that the diagrams may not accurately represent the behavior of light in different frames, leading to confusion. There is also mention of the need for clarity in how time is represented in the context of special relativity.

  • #91
Vitro said:
That's all wrong. The clock above is STATIONARY, it doesn't travel anywhere.

He made up the scenario, so if he wants to do it in a frame in which the clock is moving, that's ok as long as he does it right. In my post just now I explained how to do it right.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
Grimble said:
OK. There have been many occasions where I have been asked just what my problem is and after much thought I think the simplest way to elucidate it is like this:
Everything about relativity and time dilation, proper time, coordinate time, world lines etc. makes perfect sense; however ...

Take a moving clock with a two second tick - (e.g. a light clock with the mirrors 1 light second apart)
It travels for 10 seconds at 0.6c, traveling 6 light seconds, from event 1 to event 2.
This inertial clock will tick 5 times in that journey. The light will be reflected from the distant mirror 5 times and will arrive back at the clock's base, for the fifth time at event B. So we know that, measured from the frame of the clock, 10 seconds elapses between event 1 and event 2; that the clock travels inertially for 10 seconds covering a distance of 6 light seconds at 0.6c.
However, as shewn in this diagram from Wikipedia, where in our scenario
Δt = 2 seconds;
Δt' = 2.5 seconds
1/2 v Δt' = .75 light seconds which gives us 7.5 light seconds between events 1 & 2 in 12.5 seconds.
Measured from a stationary frame the traveling clock takes longer and travels further.
View attachment 208094
Now the problem that I have is that it is the same journey between events 1 & 2.
10 seconds measured for the inertial clock by the observer traveling with the clock is proper time - time measured between two events on the clock traveling inertially between those events.
12.5 seconds measured by the stationary observer measuring the time passing for the moving clock in the stationary frame.
In the Lecture in which he introduced his Spacetime theory, when discussing length contraction, Minkowski said
The distance the clock travels is the same = 6 light seconds.
The proper time, measured by/recorded on, the clock between the events is 10 seconds. (specified in the description)
The coordinate time for the moving clock is longer = 12.5 seconds measured by the observer at rest in the stationary frame. This is the total of the time measured internally by the clock, the proper elapsed time, and the time taken to travel the distance from event 1 to event 2. (Added as vectors - simple pythagorean triangles)

Based on my interpretation of what you wrote, I have constructed a spacetime diagram on rotated graph paper.
I think you can count diamonds to identify the various numbers in your problem statement.
However, I cannot identify the problem you are having.
upload_2017-8-1_11-28-27.png
 
  • #93
Thank you all, I can see that I have much to consider in understanding where I am going wrong. I can see I am still struggling to separate proper and coordinate time and spacetime diagrams.
I will be back...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 88 ·
3
Replies
88
Views
8K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
390