I Relativity of Simultaneity: What Einstein's Contribution Was

e.chaniotakis
Messages
80
Reaction score
3
TL;DR Summary
A silly question about the relativity of simultaneity
Something that I consider very silly, yet I try to solve relates to the relativity of simultaneity. According to SR , two evevnts taking place in different positions along the line of relative motion of two inertial observers are not simultaneous in both frames.

Now, I wanted to see how this relates to the speed of light and its independence of the motion of the source of the light ray.
If we suppose that we have three rockets, A , B and C all moving towards the positive x-axis with velocities equal to u each with respect to an inertial observer O. Let us suppose that the rockets start moving at t=0 with respect to O from positions x=0 for A, x=x for B and x=2x for C.

At a time equal to t with respect to O, B emits two light rays back to back towards A and C. According to B, the rays will arrive at A and C simultaneously.
However, according to O , the ray towards A will arrive first and the ray towards C will arrive last. Ergo, relativity of simultaneity.
So far so good.

Now let us suppose that for a moment we go back to Galileo's time and we perform the same experiment while unaware that c=invariant with respect to observers and we believe that as with any other projectile, the projectile emitted will obey the Galilean transformation of velocities.
From B's point of view the rays will be emitted with velocities -c and c and aill arrive simultaneously to A and C.

From O's point of view the rays will be emitted with velocities u-c and u+c towards A and C respectively.
The ratio of arrival times to A and to C will be a function of the speed of the projectile and of the velocities of the rockets. This ratio will be equal to 1 when u=c ( if I did the math correctly).
This implies that a (wrong) Galilean treatment of the problem predicts that the only way that two events can be considered simultaneous in the frames of O and of B is when the relative motion equals the speed of light.
Now as Galilean relativity doesn't have an upper value for the speed of a projectile this could be interpreted by saying that in Galilean relativity there can exist two inertial frames which observe two events taking place at different positions along their line of motion simultaneously.

Is that correct?

Therefore, Einstein's contribution here is that by introducing the fact that the speed of light is not affected by the speed of the source, he secures that there cannot exist two inertial reference frames observing two spatially separated events as simultaneous.

What is your view on this treatment?
Thank you for your time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
e.chaniotakis said:
Let us suppose that the rockets start moving at t=0 with respect to O from positions x=0 for A, x=x for B and x=2x for C.
It's bad notation to label a specific point using the same letter as the coordinate itself unless you have, say, a subscript to distinguish the coordinate of the specific point and the general coordinate. It's possible that this is causing you to confuse yourself and make errors. Let's just simplify this and say at t=0, A is at x=0, B is at x=1, and C is at x=2.
e.chaniotakis said:
the projectile emitted will obey the Galilean transformation of velocities.
If we're assuming a universe where the Galilean transformation governs the behavior of light, then you could just as easily set up a scenario where B rolls bowling balls instead of shooting light beams, in which case, the answer is obvious and intuitive: if the bowling balls reach A and C simultaneously in the moving frame, then those two events will also be simultaneous in frame O. If you want to work it out mathematically, see below.
e.chaniotakis said:
The ratio of arrival times to A and to C will be a function of the speed of the projectile and of the velocities of the rockets. This ratio will be equal to 1 when u=c ( if I did the math correctly).
Assuming simultaneity of A and C receiving the light beams in the moving frame, then the ratio of arrival times in frame O will be equal to 1 regardless of u and c. All you have to do is find the intersection of the two lines ##x=ut## and ##x=(u-c)t+1## and then the intersection of lines ##x=ut+2## and ##x=(u+c)t+1##.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker
e.chaniotakis said:
Now let us suppose that for a moment we go back to Galileo's time and we perform the same experiment while unaware that c=invariant with respect to observers and we believe that as with any other projectile, the projectile emitted will obey the Galilean transformation of velocities.
From B's point of view the rays will be emitted with velocities -c and c and aill arrive simultaneously to A and C.

This is incorrect.

If rocket B emits two light rays towards A and C, the light ray towards A will arrive first and the one towards C will arrive second.
The time intervals will be x/c+u for B-to-A and x/c-u for B-to-C.

According to Galilean relativity, time is absolute, not relative.
This means that the clocks for O and B are always synchronized, even when B is moving.
So, both O and B will see the arrival of B-to-A at the same time (and then B-to-C also at the same time - but later).
 
x-vision said:
If rocket B emits two light rays towards A and C, the light ray towards A will arrive first and the one towards C will arrive second.
Not if you’re assuming the light gets an additive velocity boost from the motion of B. Of course this isn’t the way the universe really works, but it was the OP’s hypothetical scenario.
 
Pencilvester said:
Not if you’re assuming the light gets an additive velocity boost from the motion of B.
True. I automatically assumed an "undular" light propagation rather than corpuscular ;).
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top