Let a clock A be at rest in an inertial frame and let a clock B rotate

Yayness
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Let a clock A be at rest in an inertial frame and let a clock B rotate around it with constant velocity and constant distance from A. Let v be the velocity of B relative to the inertial frame.
Both clocks count how long it takes for B to rotate once.
According to clock A, the time it takes is t, and according to clock B, the time it takes is τ.

My book used the formula from SR about time difference: t=γτ
I tried to find out if that was right and ended up with t=γ²τ. Is the book wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Yayness said:
Let a clock A be at rest in an inertial frame and let a clock B rotate around it with constant velocity and constant distance from A. Let v be the velocity of B relative to the inertial frame.
Both clocks count how long it takes for B to rotate once.
According to clock A, the time it takes is t, and according to clock B, the time it takes is τ.

My book used the formula from SR about time difference: t=γτ
I tried to find out if that was right and ended up with t=γ²τ. Is the book wrong?

How did you arrive at your answer? I think the book is right. This is speed dependent effecat.
 


I'll try to explain it shortly.

The path of the clock B forms a circle. Let this circle be at rest relative to the inertial frame and let the radius be r.

I added a non-inertial frame of reference where B is at rest. This reference frame does not rotate around its own axis, so left will always be left, and right will always be right etc.
In this reference frame the circle will look like an ellipse (because of length contradiction, as the whole circle has the same velocity relative to the reference frame), and B will always be located where the curvature of the ellipse is largest.

I added an imaginary circle inside the ellipse, and the perimeter goes through the clock B. The imaginary circle and the ellipse have the same curvature in this point. (See attachment.)

Because the curvature is the same, the clock B will feel an acceleration equal to v² divided by the radius of the imaginary circle (which is r/γ²). So the acceleration B will feel, is γ²v²/r, like if the radius of the real circle were r/γ².

I let t=2πr/v and τ=2πr/(γ²v) (because the radius of the imaginary circle is r/γ²). That's basically how I ended up with t=γ²τ.
 

Attachments

  • ellipse.png
    ellipse.png
    1.6 KB · Views: 489
Last edited:


Yayness said:
I'll try to explain it shortly.

The path of the clock B forms a circle. Let this circle be at rest relative to the inertial frame and let the radius be r.

I added a non-inertial frame of reference where B is at rest. This reference frame does not rotate around its own axis, so left will always be left, and right will always be right etc.
In this reference frame the circle will look like an ellipse (because of length contradiction, as the whole circle has the same velocity relative to the reference frame)
The length contraction rule is only defined relative to inertial frames, you can't assume it would work the same way in a non-inertial frame. In the most common type of rotating frame, the path would still be a circle. If you want to use a different type of frame, you need to at least give a specific definition of the coordinate transformation from the inertial frame to your non-inertial frame, only then can you figure out how clocks will behave in this frame (just like with the length contraction formula, the standard time dilation formula also doesn't generally work in non-inertial frames).

In any case, why bring non-inertial frames into this? You can figure out the time on the rotating clock using an inertial frame, it's much easier.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
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...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
Back
Top