Reichenbach Synchronisation: Proving i=r

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Reichenbach synchronisation method and its implications for proving that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection (##i = r##). Participants explore the one-way speed of light in different directions and the transformation between Minkowski and Anderson coordinates, examining how these concepts relate to the proposed proof.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that using Reichenbach synchronisation, the one-way speed of light in the x and y-direction is ##\frac{c}{2\epsilon}## and in the reverse direction is ##\frac{c}{2(1-\epsilon)}##, leading to an average round trip speed of light of ##c##.
  • The same participant expresses a goal to prove that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection, noting that using Huyghens leads to different results.
  • Another participant introduces their use of units where ##c=1## and Anderson coordinates, providing a transformation between Minkowski and Anderson coordinates and discussing the equations for ingoing and outgoing null geodesics.
  • This participant claims that the transformation does not affect spatial coordinates, only the temporal coordinate, suggesting that the angle remains the same in both cases.
  • Several participants inquire about "Anderson coordinates," indicating a need for additional resources or clarification on the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the proof of ##i = r##, as participants present different approaches and raise questions about the underlying concepts. The discussion includes competing views on the implications of the transformations and the use of different coordinate systems.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully resolved the implications of their respective approaches, and there are missing assumptions regarding the definitions and applications of the coordinate systems discussed.

wnvl2
Messages
64
Reaction score
14
I use Reichenbach synchronisation. The one-way speed of light (OWSOL) in the x and y-direction is ##\frac{c}{2\epsilon}## and in the reverse direction it is for both ##\frac{c}{2(1-\epsilon)}## such that the average round trip speed of light is ##c##. For any choice of ##\epsilon## the physical laws should remain the sames as for ##\epsilon = \frac{1}{2}##.

My goal is to prove that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection. When using Huyghens it is obvous that I get a different result.

How can I prove ##i = r##?
mirror.png
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I use units where ##c=1## and Anderson coordinates so ##\kappa=2 \epsilon-1##. The transform between Minkowski coordinates (lower case) and Anderson coordinates (upper case) is: $$ t=T+\kappa X$$ $$x=X$$ $$y=Y$$ $$z=Z$$

So, in the Minkowski coordinates we can write the equation of an ingoing null geodesic as $$r^\mu(t,x,y,z) = \left( \lambda, -\frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} ,0 \right)$$ for ##\lambda<0## and the equation of an outgoing null geodesic as $$r^\mu(t,x,y,z) = \left( \lambda, \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} ,0 \right)$$ for ##0<\lambda##.

Then transforming from the Minkowski coordinates to the Anderson coordinates we get $$r^\mu(T,X,Y,Z) = \left( \lambda + \frac{\kappa\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , -\frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} ,0 \right)$$ and $$r^\mu(T,X,Y,Z) = \left( \lambda - \frac{\kappa\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} , \frac{\lambda}{\sqrt{2}} ,0 \right)$$

So the transformation does not affect the spatial coordinates, just the temporal coordinate. So the angle is the same in both cases.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72 and wnvl2
Do you have a link about "Anderson coordinates"?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 93 ·
4
Replies
93
Views
6K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 127 ·
5
Replies
127
Views
9K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
3K