Train Simulation: Observer A and B Contradiction?

In summary, the clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant, but according to observer A, the front flash was seen first, which means the strikes must have occurred first in the platform frame.
  • #1
Besso
3
0
TL;DR Summary
Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.
I have not seen this exact configuration discussed. Observer A in middle of train. Observer B at station. Both A and B think the other is moving. Observer A synchronizes two clocks and puts one at each end of train. Lightning strikes both clocks stopping them when A passes B. B says strikes were simultaneous. A says flash from front is seen first so must have occurred first. But then A checks clocks. Clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant. Contradiction?
 
  • Sad
Likes PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Besso said:
Contradiction?
I think you have specified that the clocks stopped simultaneously according to B, but read as if they were stopped simultaneously according to A. So the problem is that you are contradicting yourself (i.e. your result is impossible given the setup you specified), not with relativity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and vanhees71
  • #3
Besso said:
TL;DR Summary: Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.

I have not seen this exact configuration discussed. Observer A in middle of train. Observer B at station. Both A and B think the other is moving.
What does that mean? Do you mean the train and station are moving relative to each other?
Besso said:
Observer A synchronizes two clocks and puts one at each end of train.
Okay.
Besso said:
Lightning strikes both clocks stopping them when A passes B.
"When" according to the train frame or the platfform frame?
Besso said:
B says strikes were simultaneous.
They are, if they were simultaneous in the platform frame.
Besso said:
A says flash from front is seen first so must have occurred first.
If the strikes are simultaneous in the platform frame, then in the train frame the strike at front of the train happens first. You can calculate this from the Lorentz Transformation.
Besso said:
But then A checks clocks. Clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant.
Same instant according to which frame? If the same instant in the platform frame, then the front clock was stopped first in the train frame.
Besso said:
Contradiction?
No. Only a basic lack of understanding of reference frames.
 
  • Like
Likes Ibix
  • #4
Besso said:
TL;DR Summary: Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.
You can find a presumably correct description and solution for this scenario in chapter 1.3.1 "Loss of simultaneity" (page 12), in the book "Special Relativity: For the Enthusiastic Beginner" (D. Morin), see free PDF link "Chapter 1" under:
https://scholar.harvard.edu/david-morin/special-relativity
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, PeroK, malawi_glenn and 1 other person
  • #5
Besso said:
TL;DR Summary: Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.

I have not seen this exact configuration discussed. Observer A in middle of train. Observer B at station. Both A and B think the other is moving. Observer A synchronizes two clocks and puts one at each end of train. Lightning strikes both clocks stopping them when A passes B. B says strikes were simultaneous. A says flash from front is seen first so must have occurred first. But then A checks clocks. Clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant. Contradiction?
I thought you died in 1955 (Einstein's early friend and collaborator, Michele Besso).
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes malawi_glenn, Sagittarius A-Star and Ibix
  • #6
Besso said:
TL;DR Summary: Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.

I have not seen this exact configuration discussed. Observer A in middle of train. Observer B at station. Both A and B think the other is moving. Observer A synchronizes two clocks and puts one at each end of train. Lightning strikes both clocks stopping them when A passes B. B says strikes were simultaneous. A says flash from front is seen first so must have occurred first. But then A checks clocks. Clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant. Contradiction?
This is impossible. If A synchronized his co-moving clocks and he sees the front flash was first, then A's clocks can not indicate the same time of the strikes.
 
  • #7
PAllen said:
I thought you died in 1955 (Einstein's early friend and collaborator, Michele Besso).
Well, it makes a change from endless variations on Einstein, Feynman and Hawking.
 
  • Like
Likes Sagittarius A-Star
  • #8
PeroK said:
What does that mean? Do you mean the train and station are moving relative to each other?

Okay.

"When" according to the train frame or the platfform frame?

They are, if they were simultaneous in the platform frame.

If the strikes are simultaneous in the platform frame, then in the train frame the strike at front of the train happens first. You can calculate this from the Lorentz Transformation.

Same instant according to which frame? If the same instant in the platform frame, then the front clock was stopped first in the train frame.

No. Only a basic lack of understanding of reference frames.
Thanks for the comments. I know this can be unraveled. Just trying to be provocative with the “contradiction?” comment. But it would be helpful to me to discuss a little more detail about what’s happening. As the frames pass, the lightning bolts strike in B’s frame. What if B has two clocks that were just below the train‘s two clocks at the instant of the strikes which show B that the bolts struck simultaneously in B’s frame. That is, both pairs of clocks are lined up and receive the strikes at the same instant. I know this last statement is probably an impossible configuration, but I can’t quite visualize what is happening in detail.
 
  • #9
Besso said:
Thanks for the comments. I know this can be unraveled. Just trying to be provocative with the “contradiction?” comment. But it would be helpful to me to discuss a little more detail about what’s happening. As the frames pass, the lightning bolts strike in B’s frame. What if B has two clocks that were just below the train‘s two clocks at the instant of the strikes which show B that the bolts struck simultaneously in B’s frame. That is, both pairs of clocks are lined up and receive the strikes at the same instant. I know this last statement is probably an impossible configuration, but I can’t quite visualize what is happening in detail.
That essentially is the heart of SR. One way to look at it is to use the concept of length contraction, if you are familiar with that.

We have a train of length ##l## and a platform of length ##L##, say. If ##l = L## then in the platform frame the train will be shorter than the platform. And in the train frame the platform will be shorter than the train. The clocks at the ends of the train and ends of the platform won't line up in that case.

Suppose now you make the train longer, so that in the platform frame it just fits neatly with the length of the platform and the two sets of clocks do indeed line up in the platform frame.

But, in the train frame, the platform is now even shorter than the train and the two sets of clocks don't line up. The ones at the front line up first, when the front of the train reaches the far end of the platform (in the train frame). The rear ones line up later, when the rear of the train reaches the near end of the platform.

This highlights the relativity of simultaneity, and shows that you cannot have a pair of clocks at rest in one frame and synchonised in both frames. If they are synchronised in one frame, they are out of sync in the other.
 
  • #10
You mean that you want the lightning bolts to be simultaneous in both A's frame and B's? Yes, that's impossible.

The best way to visualise relativity is a Minkowski diagram. I produced an interactive diagram uears ago. Go to https://ibises.org.uk/Minkowski.html, scroll near the bottom, and click "Make Einstein's train". You get a displacement-time diagram showing the positions of the embankment observer and clocks (black) and train observer and clocks (green) and the light from the lightning flashes travelling to the center. Tap on a green line and click "Boost to selected line rest frame" to animate a frame change.
 
  • Like
Likes robphy and PeroK
  • #11
PeroK said:
That essentially is the heart of SR. One way to look at it is to use the concept of length contraction, if you are familiar with that.

We have a train of length ##l## and a platform of length ##L##, say. If ##l = L## then in the platform frame the train will be shorter than the platform. And in the train frame the platform will be shorter than the train. The clocks at the ends of the train and ends of the platform won't line up in that case.

Suppose now you make the train longer, so that in the platform frame it just fits neatly with the length of the platform and the two sets of clocks do indeed line up in the platform frame.

But, in the train frame, the platform is now even shorter than the train and the two sets of clocks don't line up. The ones at the front line up first, when the front of the train reaches the far end of the platform (in the train frame). The rear ones line up later, when the rear of the train reaches the near end of the platform.

This highlights the relativity of simultaneity, and shows that you cannot have a pair of clocks at rest in one frame and synchonised in both frames. If they are synchronised in one frame, they are out of sync in the other.
Thanks. This kind of detail is helpful.
 
  • #12
Besso said:
TL;DR Summary: Simultaneity measurement on train equipped with synchronized clocks at each end.

Clocks read that they were stopped at the same instant. Contradiction?
No. The clocks reading the same is explained by B, that they were in fact never synchronized properly in B's rest frame.
 

1. What is "Train Simulation: Observer A and B Contradiction"?

"Train Simulation: Observer A and B Contradiction" is a simulation game that allows players to experience the role of two different observers on a train. Observer A is on the train, while Observer B is watching the train from a stationary point. The game explores the concept of relativity and how perceptions can differ between observers.

2. How does the game simulate the concept of relativity?

The game uses a combination of visual and auditory cues to simulate the concept of relativity. Observer A will experience the train moving at a constant speed, while Observer B will see the train moving at a different speed due to their stationary position. This creates a contradiction in perception between the two observers.

3. What is the objective of the game?

The objective of the game is to navigate the train and reach the end of the track without crashing. This requires players to use their understanding of relativity to make decisions and adjust their perception accordingly.

4. Is the game based on any scientific principles?

Yes, the game is based on the scientific principle of relativity, specifically the theory of special relativity proposed by Albert Einstein. It explores the idea that time, space, and motion can be perceived differently by observers depending on their relative positions and speeds.

5. Can this game be used for educational purposes?

Yes, the game can be used as a teaching tool to help students understand the concept of relativity. It provides a visual and interactive way to explore the theory and can be a useful supplement to traditional classroom lessons.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
517
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
746
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
613
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
4
Replies
116
Views
6K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
438
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
3K
Back
Top