Is Periodicity Preserved in Relativistic Phenomena?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eynstone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativistic
Eynstone
Messages
335
Reaction score
0
Is a phenomenon which is periodic in a frame A of reference also periodic in another frame B moving at a constant speed v with respect to A ?
I think general relativity will answer this in the negative. How about special relativity?
Consider a world line in A with the equation x=f(t) ; with f(t)= f(t+T) , T being the period. This won't transforms into x' = g(t') with a periodic g() as x,t depend on both x',t' . What form must f have in order to preserve periodicity?
(For instance f(t) =ct transforms well , but f(t) = sin wt doesn't.)
Since we determine time by periodic phenomena, I'd also like to ask how the arguments involving 'clock synchronization' in special relativity are to hold valid.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think periodicity of a world-line can sort of be defined in a coordinate-invariant way in GR. At least, there are certain properties of a periodically varying world-line that we can verify are periodic, in a coordinate-invariant way. For example, if an observer moves along the world-line with an accelerometer, he can verify that the reading on the accelerometer is a periodic function of proper time. I think this is weaker than the SR notion, however. E.g., it won't tell you anything useful about whether a geodesic is periodic, since the accelerometer will read zero the whole time. Maybe you can sense higher covariant derivatives, though. You can also sense, e.g., whether the variation of a curvature scalar with respect to proper time is periodic.

Eynstone said:
Since we determine time by periodic phenomena, I'd also like to ask how the arguments involving 'clock synchronization' in special relativity are to hold valid.

This is much easier. The clocks just have to be small enough so that, by the equivalence principle, SR is a good approximation. This is related to what people sometimes refer to as the "clock postulate," although it isn't really a postulate because it can be proved from the ordinary postulates of SR. Some references:

http://www.phys.uu.nl/igg/dieks/rotation.pdf (see p. 9)
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/clock.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
According to the General Theory of Relativity, time does not pass on a black hole, which means that processes they don't work either. As the object becomes heavier, the speed of matter falling on it for an observer on Earth will first increase, and then slow down, due to the effect of time dilation. And then it will stop altogether. As a result, we will not get a black hole, since the critical mass will not be reached. Although the object will continue to attract matter, it will not be a...
Back
Top