- #1
- 10,302
- 1,472
I was thinking - and reading a bit - about the size limit on accelerated frames, and there is an interesting and relevant result I found.
If we rephrase the question from "is there a size limit on an accelerated frame" to "is there a size limit on an accelerated body in irrottational born rigid motion", it is known that the answer is yes, there is a limit. This was pointed out by Born in 1909, according to wiki;
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Born_rigidity&oldid=961398833
The limit is that the proper acceleration must be less than c^2/R, where R is the radius of a sphere in which the body is located. I couldn't tell from the wiki article where the proper acceleration was measured, presumably at the center of the sphere - it will vary.
So, as long as we demand that our accelerated frame have the property that objects "at rest in the frame" maintain a constant distance from each other, then there IS a known limit on the size of an accelerated frame.
If we rephrase the question from "is there a size limit on an accelerated frame" to "is there a size limit on an accelerated body in irrottational born rigid motion", it is known that the answer is yes, there is a limit. This was pointed out by Born in 1909, according to wiki;
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Born_rigidity&oldid=961398833
wiki said:Already Born (1909) pointed out that a rigid body in translational motion has a maximal spatial extension depending on its acceleration, given by the relation ...
The limit is that the proper acceleration must be less than c^2/R, where R is the radius of a sphere in which the body is located. I couldn't tell from the wiki article where the proper acceleration was measured, presumably at the center of the sphere - it will vary.
So, as long as we demand that our accelerated frame have the property that objects "at rest in the frame" maintain a constant distance from each other, then there IS a known limit on the size of an accelerated frame.