Relativistic Simultaneity: A Thought Experiment

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a thought experiment involving relativistic simultaneity, comparing scenarios with marbles and photons to explore how different observers perceive the timing of events. The scope includes conceptual reasoning about relativity and classical physics, as well as the implications of observer frames in special relativity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Observer (A) on the train perceives marbles reaching detectors simultaneously in scenario 2, while observer (B) on the platform may not agree due to the train's motion.
  • Some participants argue that the velocities of marbles depend on the train's speed, while the speed of photons remains constant at c, leading to different conclusions about simultaneity.
  • One participant asserts that scenario 2 with marbles uses classical physics, while scenario 3 with photons incorporates relativistic principles.
  • A later reply suggests that relativistic velocity addition must be applied to understand the timing of marble arrivals in the platform frame.
  • Another participant emphasizes that simultaneity is frame-dependent and that any simultaneous events in one frame will not be simultaneous in another, regardless of the nature of the events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the marbles and photons yield different results regarding simultaneity due to the effects of relativity, but there is no consensus on the implications of scenario 2 with marbles, as some believe it is plausible while others do not.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexity of simultaneity in different frames and the need for relativistic considerations, particularly regarding the velocities of objects in motion. There are unresolved aspects related to the application of classical versus relativistic physics in the scenarios presented.

Milsomonk
Messages
100
Reaction score
17
Hi guys,
I've been asked to check somebody's relativity logic and i'd love to get s second opinion as it's easy to slip up.

There is a train, with an observer (A) in the middle, with a device that fires marbles simultaneously up the train and down the train. There is also a detector at each end of the train that has a clock which records when the marble arrives.

There is also an observer (B) on a platform, they also have detectors which independently record the time the marble arrives.

scenario 1
in the case that the train is stationary observer (A) and (B) are at the same point in the axis of the train and therefore have the same frame of reference and the detectors clocks agree

scenario 2
the train is moving, observer (A) sees the marbles reach each of their detectors (on the train) simultaneously. Observer (B) also sees the marbles reach each of their detectors (on the platform) simultaneously.

scenario 3
scenario 2 is repeated but instead of marbles, photons are used, this time observer (A) and (B), detectors show different times and there for conclude that the photons reaching their respective detectors are not simultaneous events.

My first issue is with scenario 2 with the marbles, I do not think the two observers detector clocks would show the same time, and I do not think that replacing marbles with photons would make any difference other than making the relativistic effect more noticeable. it seems like for scenario 2 with marbles they have used classical physics and for scenario 2 with photons they have considered relativity. would anyone agree with my conclusion on this thought experiment? or are they correct and I am missing something? Many thanks for your help :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You are missing that the velocities relative to the train station of marbles depend on the velocity of the train and the velocities of the marbles relative to the train. The velocities of photons are always ##c##. You cannot replace photons with marbles. Also, I don't believe that scenario 2 is plausible although I did not write the equations. If the train travels at relativistic speeds you cannot have the firing of the marbles and the detection of the marbles occur simultaneously in both frames A and B.
 
Milsomonk said:
it seems like for scenario 2 with marbles they have used classical physics and for scenario 2 with photons they have considered relativity. would anyone agree with my conclusion on this thought experiment?
You are correct. They should have used the relativistic velocity addition. That would show that the marbles do not arrive at the same time in the platform frame.
 
Hi, thanks for your response. I see my mistake now, the observers in the case of the photons would both agree on the speeds as it is c in both frames. but in the case of scenario 2 with the marbles are you saying you would agree with me that the the observers would not conclude that the events happen simultaneously?
 
Yes. In the platform frame the arrivals will not be simultaneous.
 
Ah yeah that's what I thought about the relativistic velocity addition. thank you for your help :)
 
Milsomonk said:
Ah yeah that's what I thought about the relativistic velocity addition. thank you for your help :)

It's a good exercise to calculate the speeds of the marbles in both directions in the platform frame and the time it takes the marbles to reach the ends of the train (again in the platform frame).

Hint: if you know about the relativity of simultaneity and the "leading clocks lag" rule, then you should know the answer (for the time difference) in advance!

PS Note that the relativity of simultaneity between frames does not require any light sources in your experiment. Any pair of simultaneous events in one frame will not be simultaneous in another - as long as they are separated along the direction of relative motion. In that respect light has nothing to do with it.
 
Last edited:
Great answers, thanks very much for the help everyone :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
813
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K