High School Simultaneity in Special Relativity: Examining the Theory

  • Thread starter Thread starter MartinWyckmans
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Simultaneity
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of simultaneity in special relativity, particularly the confusion surrounding the perception of events from different frames of reference. A scenario involving a moving sensor and falling balls is presented to illustrate the idea that light travels at speed c in all inertial frames, regardless of the sensor's motion. Participants clarify that the velocities in relativity do not add linearly, and the speed of light remains constant at c, which contradicts the initial assumption that light could appear to travel at a reduced speed relative to the sensor. The analogy of messengers from ancient cities is used to further explore the time difference in communication, reinforcing that simultaneity is frame-dependent. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the relativistic effects on time and distance.
MartinWyckmans
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Thanks for opening the millionth thread about this. My teacher has been explaining special relativity and I became confused at simultaneity.
This is my train of thought, where did I go wrong?

Say a sensor is moving at a speed of c-1 m/s to the right. Somewhere to the left of the sensor there's a wall with a small opening. 2 balls fall down behind the wall and the distance between the balls is 1 meter, and when they pass the small opening the ray of light that gets reflected by the ball gets sent through the opening. The ray of light moves to the right, towards the sensor, with a speed of c. Taking the sensor as point of view, the light travels towards the sensor with 1 m/s. If the second ray of light coming from the second ball hits the sensor 1 second later than the first sensor, then the rays of light began traveling at the same time and the balls would fall simultaneously. In other words, if \Delta t = \Delta x / (c-v) with \Delta t the time difference measured in the sensor, then the actions happen simultaneously.
And say the sensor is moving towards the wall/balls/ray of light, then the formula would be \Delta t = \Delta x / (c+v)
My teacher dismissed my question almost immediately because he said (c+v) is impossible, but I'm not saying the sensor is traveling with a speed that's (c+v). Is it still wrong?

I don't know if I've made myself very clear, so maybe an analogy works better.

Say there're 3 ancient cities; Sparta, Athens and Rome. One day, a messager from Athens visits Sparta, saying the city has been sacked. Two days later, a messager from Rome visits Sparta, saying Rome has been sacked. The Spartans are fearful and wonder whether the same empire sacked both cities. They know that the distance between Sparta and Athens is 200 kilometers and the distance between Sparta and Rome is 600 kilometers. The messagers are trained to run 200 kilometers each day. The time between the two messagers was 2 days. Calculating the time difference with the formula: \Delta t = \Delta x / v 2 = 400 / 200 and we see that the time difference is indeed 2 days.

Does this not apply in special relativity? I know that getting the right velocity v would be very difficult to really use, but is this how it theoretically works?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!
MartinWyckmans said:
... the distance between the balls is 1 meter...
In which frame of reference? Distance is relative.
MartinWyckmans said:
...the light travels towards the sensor with 1 m/s.
The light travels toward the sensor at speed c, the speed of light is c in every inertial frame of reference.
 
MartinWyckmans said:
Taking the sensor as point of view, the light travels towards the sensor with 1 m/s.

No, it doesn't. Velocities add differently in relativity; see here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula#Special_relativity

If you plug in c and c minus 1 m/sec in the formula, you will see that it gives the result c, which means that light moves at c relative to the sensor from the sensor's point of view.
 
Thanks both of you, I'm beginning to better understand it now!
 
MOVING CLOCKS In this section, we show that clocks moving at high speeds run slowly. We construct a clock, called a light clock, using a stick of proper lenght ##L_0##, and two mirrors. The two mirrors face each other, and a pulse of light bounces back and forth betweem them. Each time the light pulse strikes one of the mirrors, say the lower mirror, the clock is said to tick. Between successive ticks the light pulse travels a distance ##2L_0## in the proper reference of frame of the clock...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 221 ·
8
Replies
221
Views
15K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K