Question about light and relativity

  • Thread starter Thread starter thunderchicken
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Relativity
thunderchicken
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Another question about light and relativity:

The way I “understand” the theory of relativity is that it is based on the fact that light always moves at a constant speed in the direction which you perceive it to be traveling. This is how (I think?) Einstein’s light-clock and spaceship analogy works.

My question is this: If relativity is based on the observer’s perception of light’s direction, does optical perspective (reality) have an effect?

As the light clock gets farther and farther away from the observer, the distance the light is traveling appears to decrease dramatically until it eventually disappears. If the perceived vertical distance the light has to travel becomes shorter, and light continued to travel at the same speed as always, would the clock not tick faster and faster the farther away it gets?

It seems to me that the thought experiment only works if the two clocks can be perceived as being exactly equal in height – something that is simply not possible. In reality, shouldn’t the person the spaceship age way faster??

Thanks for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So, what would the observer see then as the clock moves away?
 
in special relativity to "see" means to detect at the same time light signals that have left a luminous object at different times. special relativity is involved with many clocks. The light clock you have singled out measures a proper time interval whereas the stationary clocks it meets during its trip measure by the difference between theirs readings a non-
proper time interval.
I think you should rephrase your question. Please have a look at a paper of mine "Illustrating Einstein's special relativity" arxiv phyhsics education 2005.
 
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...
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...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top