Speed of light in non inertial frames

obnoxiousris
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
sorry to bring this up again, i have just started special relativity and the constancy of c is a bit confusing, i get how c is the same in all inertial frames but what about accelerating frames? do observers in acceleration still see c as a constant? i have seen many forum posts and they always have two people saying the opposite things, can somebody set me straight on this?

also, if the observer is moving at 0.99c and he will see c still being c, but what about a stationary observer looking at both? will he see both of them traveling almost at the same speed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It really depends on which clocks and rulers you use. If you have an accelerating frame, by the equivalence principle you'll have something that looks like a local gravitational field. This means that clocks that are "up" higher in this field will run faster than clocks that are "lower" - they won't all run at the same rate.

If you use local clocks and local rulers, things are simple - the speed of light is always 'c', it doesn't matter whether you accelerate or not.

However, you will not find that the path that light travels is given by the equation x=ct in an accelerated frame - the coordinate expression for light's path is more complex than that.
 
Light always travels at C in a vacuum. The postulate of SR states the invariance of the speed of light. This invariance is without caveats barring the medium traveled through.
 
obnoxiousris said:
sorry to bring this up again, i have just started special relativity and the constancy of c is a bit confusing, i get how c is the same in all inertial frames but what about accelerating frames? do observers in acceleration still see c as a constant? i have seen many forum posts and they always have two people saying the opposite things, can somebody set me straight on this?
Read this: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2885196&postcount=4

also, if the observer is moving at 0.99c and he will see c still being c, but what about a stationary observer looking at both? will he see both of them traveling almost at the same speed?
Yes. The 'stationary' observer will see the 'moving' observer moving at 0.99c and the light moving at c.
 
thanks guys, really helped!
 
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...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top