Solving Special Relativity Equation: Rail Car Thought Experiment

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 2K views
Alex Pavel
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I know that c is the same in all reference frames. I am trying to understand the rail car thought experiment.
I've got it down pretty well except for one part - the difference between an observer moving toward a light source versus an observer moving away from a light source at the same relative velocity.

- We have two observers in a train moving east at, say, 0.3c relative to the track. It is a very long train, two light seconds long.
- We have two synchronized clocks at the two targets, A (Alice) and B (Bob)
- Observer (C) Charlie is on the train in the middle and he controls the light source
- Alice stands 1 light second east, and Bob is 1 light second west (29,972KM) of Charlie and the light source on the train
- An observer is on the track (David) with his own clock.
- When the center point of the train (Charlie) reaches David (on the track) the light source is switched on. At this even, all clocks are set to zero.

David, located on the track, measures the light reaching Alice at 1.3 seconds on his clock at a distance of 38,964KM east of David. He measures the light reaching Bob at 0.7 seconds, 20,980KM west of David.

- Alice, on the east end of the train, will record the time of light reaching her as 0.95 seconds.
- Bob, on the west end of the train is moving toward the light source at .3c, will also record the time of the light reaching him as: 0.95 on his clock.
Therefore, with Alice and Bob, using synchronized clocks, agree that the light beam has hit them simultaneously.

Whereas David (on the track) sees the light beam hit Bob 0.6 seconds earlier than Alice.
Thus, Alice and Bob at opposite ends of the train show identical time elapsed, while a 3rd party can perceive me meeting the light earlier or later.

This does not 'feel' correct yet I think I have the calculations right. Is this right?

Thank you!

upload_2018-1-7_13-18-9.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-1-7_13-13-14.png
    upload_2018-1-7_13-13-14.png
    12.8 KB · Views: 539
  • upload_2018-1-7_13-18-9.png
    upload_2018-1-7_13-18-9.png
    40.2 KB · Views: 512
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Alex Pavel said:
- We have two observers in a train moving west at, say, 0.3c. It is a very long train, two light seconds long.
- We have two synchronized clocks at the two targets, A (Alice) and B (Bob)
- Observer (C) Charlie is on the train in the middle and he controls the light source
So A, B, C, and the light source are all on the train?

Alex Pavel said:
- Therefore Alice is moving away from the light source.
- And Bob is moving toward the light source.
I thought A and B were on the train? And the train is moving west.

Alex Pavel said:
- When the center point of the train (Charlie) reaches David (on the track) the light source is switched on. At this even, all clocks are set to zero.
According to what frame? When you say the clocks are set to zero, I assume you mean that according to observers on the train, clocks at A, B, and C all read zero at that moment. (Observers in the ground frame would disagree.)

Whenever you state where something is at a given time (such as when the light reaches them) you must also state according to what frame.

A diagram might be nice.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alex Pavel
@Alex Pavel You have a couple of conceptual errors buried in that post. A, B, C and the light source are all on the train. As far as they are concerned they are all at rest and only D is moving. Assuming the rest length of the train is 2 light seconds, they will measure 1s for the light to travel from C to A and from C to B. In their reference frame they are not moving relative to tge source.

If A, B and C synchronize their clocks, then D will not measure them as synchronised in his frame. This is as aspect of the relativity of simultaneity.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Alex Pavel
Okay I see what I misunderstood, problem solved. Thank you.