I LIGO & Special Relativity: Is Spacetime Distortion Real?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between spacetime distortion caused by gravitational waves and the length contraction predicted by special relativity (SR). It clarifies that LIGO's findings on gravitational waves do not confirm the existence of length contraction in moving bodies, which has never been directly observed. Length contraction is described as a separate phenomenon from the curvature of spacetime associated with gravitational waves. While some experiments imply the necessity of length contraction for their interpretations, no direct tests have been conducted on macroscopic objects. The distinction between direct and indirect tests of length contraction remains a topic of debate.
zoltrix
Messages
85
Reaction score
7
Hello

Is the distortion of spacetime by gravitational waves directly related to the contraction of objects in motion predicted by special relativity ?
In other words
Besides the existence of the gravitational waves , did the LIGO experiment definitely confirm the contraction of the bodies in motion which had never been observed so far ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
zoltrix said:
Is the distortion of spacetime by gravitational waves directly related to the contraction of objects in motion predicted by special relativity ?

No. SR length contraction involves no "distortion of spacetime" at all.

zoltrix said:
Besides the existence of the gravitational waves , did the LIGO experiment definitely confirm the contraction of the bodies in motion

No. See above.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
zoltrix said:
the contraction of the bodies in motion which had never been observed so far
Lorentz certainly believed that Michelson and Morley had observed it. I tend to agree with him on that point.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
zoltrix said:
... the contraction of the bodies in motion which had never been observed so far ?
It's worth googling for "purcell magnetism length contraction"
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
At least some sources (e.g. the experimental basis of SR FAQ linked from this forum) do say that there have been no direct tests of length contraction. They mean that we've never actually carried out the rod and barn paradox experiment, and never imaged something moving fast enough that we'd expect to see length contraction. But there are many experiments that have been carried out that require length contraction for their interpretation - for example the cosmic ray muons, as well as the Michelson-Morley experiment and Purcell's explanation of the field around a current carrying wire already mentioned by others.

LIGO does not have anything to do with length contraction. Length contraction is closely related to the fact that a cylindrical rod, sliced diagonally, has an elliptical cross-section. A 3d slice (what we call "an object, now") through a 4d worldtube has a different shape depending on the angle between the worldtube and your definition of "now" - i.e., the object's velocity relative to you. This is a completely separate phenomenon from the specific type of curvature of spacetime which we call gravitational waves.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Ibix said:
At least some sources (e.g. the experimental basis of SR FAQ linked from this forum) do say that there have been no direct tests of length contraction.
Where "direct" is a matter of convention. One could argue that all measurements we make are indirect. Is the point that length contraction was not tested for macroscopic objects?
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
A.T. said:
Is the point that length contraction was not tested for macroscopic objects?
That's my reading of it, yes - we haven't done the rod-and-barn paradox scenario in practice. As you say, the distinction between a "direct" and "indirect" test is arguable, but at least some respectable sources do phrase it that way.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
509
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K