Lorentz factor for slow speeds

cshum00
Messages
215
Reaction score
0
One way to derive Lorentz factor is imagining the experiment of the light clock. This experiment is about two observers. One observer is moving at a constant speed on the x-axis and the other observer standing at rest. The observer moving along the x-axis carries a light clock which shoots a light beam vertically with respect to him. The light beam takes \Delta t_p to reach a height of d_h or d_h = v_c \Delta t_p.

The observer at rest, sees that when the light has reach the height d_h, it also has displaced a distance d_x = v_x \Delta t along the x-axis. The observer at rest also sees that the total distance displaced by the light is d_d = v_c \Delta t.

One can notice that d_h and d_d has the same velocity v_c but different times t_p and t; that is because according to Einstein's second postulate, light travels at the same speed for all inertial frames. As for time, the observer at rest is watching d_d and d_x they have the same time \Delta t; while the observer moving at a constant speed experiences a different time \Delta t_p;

[PLAIN]http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/1949/lightclock.png

So, since i have a triangle i can do the sum of the distances using the Pythagorean theorem:
(d_x)^2 + (d_h)^2 = (d_d)^2

(v_x \Delta t)^2 + (v_c \Delta t_p)^2 = (v_c \Delta t)^2

v_c^2 \Delta t^2 - v_x^2 \Delta t^2 = v_c^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 (v_x^2 - v_c^2) = v_c^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 v_c^2 (1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_c^2}) = v_c^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t = \frac {1}{\sqrt{(1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_c^2})}} \Delta t

Where \gamma = \frac {1}{\sqrt{(1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_c^2})}} is Lorentz factor.

Now, let's try the same experiment with a clock that is not light but something else traveling at a really slow speed like for example a ball with no force acting onto it so that it moves at a constant speed upward. So the equations becomes as follows:
d_x = v_x \Delta t

d_d = v_d \Delta t where v_d is no longer v_c

d_h = v_b \Delta t_p where v_b is no longer v_c

And if i apply the Pythagorean theorem i get:
(d_x)^2 + (d_h)^2 = (d_d)^2

(v_x \Delta t)^2 + (v_b \Delta t_p)^2 = (v_d \Delta t)^2

v_d^2 \Delta t^2 - v_x^2 \Delta t^2 = v_b^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 (v_x^2 - v_d^2) = v_c^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 v_d^2 (1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}) = v_b^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t = \frac {v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}}} \Delta t

Where \gamma becomes \frac {v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}}}. However, the calculations made on the textbooks they still use \gamma where v_b = v_d = v_c is still at the speed of light when it is no longer the case. Why is that?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
cshum00 said:
Now, let's try the same experiment with a clock that is not light but something else traveling at a really slow speed like for example a ball with no force acting onto it so that it moves at a constant speed upward. So the equations becomes as follows:
d_x = v_x \Delta t

d_d = v_d \Delta t where v_d is no longer v_c

d_h = v_b \Delta t_p where v_b is no longer v_c

And if i apply the Pythagorean theorem i get:
(d_x)^2 + (d_h)^2 = (d_d)^2

(v_x \Delta t)^2 + (v_b \Delta t_p)^2 = (v_d \Delta t)^2

v_d^2 \Delta t^2 - v_x^2 \Delta t^2 = v_b^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 (v_x^2 - v_d^2) = v_c^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t^2 v_d^2 (1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}) = v_b^2 \Delta t_p^2

\Delta t = \frac {v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}}} \Delta t

Where \gamma becomes \frac {v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - \frac{v_x^2}{v_d^2}}}. However, the calculations made on the textbooks they still use \gamma where v_b = v_d = v_c is still at the speed of light when it is no longer the case. Why is that?
I think it's just because the textbooks aren't usually trying to calculate what you're calculating, namely the time dilation as a function of velocities measured both in the clock rest frame (the velocity v_b) and velocities in the frame where the clock is moving (v_x and v_d). Normally the idea is that the equation expresses time dilation in terms of the the horizontal velocity of the clock in the frame where it's in motion, which would be equal to v_x for the ball. In other words:

\Delta t = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v_x^2/c^2}} \Delta t_p

If the ball has a vertical velocity of v_b in the clock rest frame, then the standard version of the time dilation equation says it must have a slower vertical velocity of v_h = (\sqrt{1 - v_x^2/c^2}) v_b in the frame where the clock is moving (you can derive this from the Lorentz transformation, but more simply you can derive it from the fact that the first postulate of relativity requires that if a ball-clock is keeping pace with a light-clock when it's at rest in one frame, then an identically-constructed ball-clock and light-clock in a different frame must still keep pace when at rest in a different frame, and we know that a light clock slows down by a factor of \sqrt{1 - v_x^2/c^2} when it has a horizontal velocity of v_x in our frame so a ball-clock must do the same). And since v_d represented the diagonal velocity, in this frame we have v_d^2 = v_h^2 + v_x^2, so substituting in the above gives v_d^2 = (1 - v_x^2/c^2)*v_b^2 + v_x^2 which can be reduced to (v_d^2 - v_x^2)/v_b^2 = (1 - v_x^2/c^2) or \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - v_x^2/c^2}} = \frac{v_b}{\sqrt{v_d^2 - v_x^2}} = \frac{v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - v_x^2/v_d^2}}. Substituting this into the standard time dilation equation I gave above gives:

\Delta t = \frac{v_b}{v_d \sqrt{1 - v_x^2/v_d^2}} \Delta t_p

Which is the same as what you got.
 
Last edited:
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...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top