Need Deflection of Light Clarification

  • Thread starter Thread starter Devin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Deflection Light
Devin
Messages
24
Reaction score
1
Both the Newtonian theory on gravitation and the General theory of Relativity predict a change in the direction of a beam of light as it propagates past a large mass. Regardless of the precision of the Δ velocity component (the component that can represent the vertical shift towards a mass), If you think in terms of vector displacement, then you have a resultant vector who's magnitude is greater than the speed of light. I apologize for the awful depiction. https://twitter.com/ValorAtmC/status/480107448385019904/photo/1 ... I understand that if this were true, a conflict with special relativity is created. With that being said, can somebody please point out what I'm missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In general relativity, the statement "the speed of light is a constant c" is true only in a local sense. That is, if you could measure the speed of a pulse of light as it passes by you, using measurements that are "close enough" to your own location, you would get c, no matter where you are.

However, the "average" speed between two "distantly" separated points, computed as Δx/Δt, can be different from c, because of effects due to the curvature of spacetime.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Devin said:
can somebody please point out what I'm missing?
Your vector displacement is the difference between a deflected path and an undeflected one. Nothing travels along this displacement vector.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
The speed of light is equal to "c" locally in any small region as measured by local clocks and local rules in any local inertial frame. However, the coordinate speed of light is not necessarily "c" in any given global coordinate system. In generalized coordinates, and in curved space-time, the coordinate speeds don't have any particular physical significance, the locally measured speeds are much more physically significant.

Some of the effects are due to the curvature of space-time, and are rather similar to how a great circle can be the shortest distance between two points on the Earth's surface, yet appear to be "curved" when plotted out on an chart. Like a great circle on the surface of the Earth, the path of light through space-time is a geodesic.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
jtbell said:
In general relativity, the statement "the speed of light is a constant c" is true only in a local sense. That is, if you could measure the speed of a pulse of light as it passes by you, using measurements that are "close enough" to your own location, you would get c, no matter where you are.

However, the "average" speed between two "distantly" separated points, computed as Δx/Δt, can be different from c, because of effects due to the curvature of spacetime.

Thank you for the response. I was just confused because I assumed a luminiferous ether.
 
Bill_K said:
Your vector displacement is the difference between a deflected path and an undeflected one. Nothing travels along this displacement vector.


Thank you for the response.
 
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...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top