Special relativity and frames of reference

winhog
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I have learned that objects moving at high velocity experience time dilation, among other things, and that there is no ultimate frame of reference in the universe. If this is so...say two galaxies pass by each other at near the speed of light...in which one would time be moving slower? There's no way to tell unless there is an ultimate frame of reference, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your close to getting it right, which is commenable as this is an issue that confuses many people. The answer is that galaxy A sees galaxy B's clock slowed down wheraes galaxy B sees galaxy A's clock slowed down this is due to the fact that time itself is relative. We can never say which inertial observer's clock has slowed down in an absolute sense.
 
In that case...why would a person on a spaceship moving quickly age slower than those on earth? (like in the grandfather paradox) Is it simply because the spaceship accelerated while the Earth didn't? Couldn't that also be considered the Earth accelerating away from the spaceship?
 
The Grandfather paradio is something different (it's a time travel paradox), your thinking of the twin paradox (which isn't a real paradox). Yes your right accelartion destroys the symmetry; accelaration in special relativity is absolute (well not stricctly as 3-acceleration is not absolute, but the important thing is that if someone is acclerating then all inertial observers agree that they are acclerating and in special relativity there is only absolute relativity between inertial observers i.e observers wo are not accelerating).
 
Aha, that makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up!
 
winhog said:
In that case...why would a person on a spaceship moving quickly age slower than those on earth? Is it simply because the spaceship accelerated while the Earth didn't?
Yes.

Couldn't that also be considered the Earth accelerating away from the spaceship?
No, because the spaceship was accelerated due to a force. It's the acceleration due to a force that counts.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
87
Views
5K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
42
Views
4K
Back
Top