I Reichenbach Synchronisation: Proving i=r

Click For Summary
Reichenbach synchronization is utilized to demonstrate that the average round trip speed of light remains constant at c, regardless of the chosen value of epsilon. The goal is to prove that the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection (i = r), but using Huyghens leads to differing results. The transformation between Minkowski and Anderson coordinates shows that while temporal coordinates are affected, spatial coordinates remain unchanged, supporting the conclusion that angles remain consistent. A link to further information on Anderson coordinates is provided. The discussion emphasizes the relationship between light speed, coordinate transformations, and angle consistency in physics.
wnvl2
Messages
62
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 cianfa72 and wnvl2
Do you have a link about "Anderson coordinates"?
 
I asked a question here, probably over 15 years ago on entanglement and I appreciated the thoughtful answers I received back then. The intervening years haven't made me any more knowledgeable in physics, so forgive my naïveté ! If a have a piece of paper in an area of high gravity, lets say near a black hole, and I draw a triangle on this paper and 'measure' the angles of the triangle, will they add to 180 degrees? How about if I'm looking at this paper outside of the (reasonable)...
The Poynting vector is a definition, that is supposed to represent the energy flow at each point. Unfortunately, the only observable effect caused by the Poynting vector is through the energy variation in a volume subject to an energy flux through its surface, that is, the Poynting theorem. As a curl could be added to the Poynting vector without changing the Poynting theorem, it can not be decided by EM only that this should be the actual flow of energy at each point. Feynman, commenting...
In an inertial frame of reference (IFR), there are two fixed points, A and B, which share an entangled state $$ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0>_A|1>_B+|1>_A|0>_B) $$ At point A, a measurement is made. The state then collapses to $$ |a>_A|b>_B, \{a,b\}=\{0,1\} $$ We assume that A has the state ##|a>_A## and B has ##|b>_B## simultaneously, i.e., when their synchronized clocks both read time T However, in other inertial frames, due to the relativity of simultaneity, the moment when B has ##|b>_B##...