I The Length of World Line: Prerequisite for Proper Time

GR191511
Messages
76
Reaction score
6
What is the prerequisite of "the length of world line equals proper time"?C=i?orC=1?If metric is-+++:
##ds^2=-c^2d\tau^2\Rightarrow whenC=i,s=\tau##
If metric is +---:
##ds^2=c^2d\tau^2\Rightarrow whenC=1,s=\tau##
So,which one?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The prerequisite is that the object have mass. The scaling factor is unimportant, it is just an arbitrary choice of units and sign convention.
 
  • Like
Likes GR191511, vanhees71 and malawi_glenn
GR191511 said:
What is the prerequisite of "the length of world line equals proper time"?
The worldline must be timelike everywhere, or else proper time is not defined for it (equivalent to Dale's comment about mass).

The value of ##c## is just a choice of ratio between units of timelike and spacelike displacements, so is unimportant. It's similar to putting a meter rule and a yardstick end to end - the total length is the sum of the components' lengths regardless of the units I used to specify them. Experienced people convert units without prompting - inserting ##c## as needed is just a novel example of something you would take in stride in other contexts.

Otherwise, if I were being precise I'd say that ##d\tau=\sqrt{|ds^2|}##. I think that saying that proper time is the length of a worldline is an imprecise analogy. I use it either with people who don't understand Minkowski geometry at all (B-level twin paradox threads) or with people who understand it well enough to know I'm being sloppy and will insert modulus signs as needed. Either way I'd probably scare-quote it.
 
  • Like
Likes GR191511, vanhees71 and malawi_glenn
Dale said:
The prerequisite is that the object have mass. The scaling factor is unimportant, it is just an arbitrary choice of units and sign convention.
Thanks
 
Ibix said:
The worldline must be timelike everywhere, or else proper time is not defined for it (equivalent to Dale's comment about mass).

The value of ##c## is just a choice of ratio between units of timelike and spacelike displacements, so is unimportant. It's similar to putting a meter rule and a yardstick end to end - the total length is the sum of the components' lengths regardless of the units I used to specify them. Experienced people convert units without prompting - inserting ##c## as needed is just a novel example of something you would take in stride in other contexts.

Otherwise, if I were being precise I'd say that ##d\tau=\sqrt{|ds^2|}##. I think that saying that proper time is the length of a worldline is an imprecise analogy. I use it either with people who don't understand Minkowski geometry at all (B-level twin paradox threads) or with people who understand it well enough to know I'm being sloppy and will insert modulus signs as needed. Either way I'd probably scare-quote it.
Thank you! I got it
 
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
31
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
5K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
293
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
57
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top