The Sagnac Effect

No. It's a negative spatial curvature, but not a negative spacetime curvature; spacetime is flat in this scenario. Exotic matter would cause a negative spacetime curvature.
Exactly. Furthermore, a coordinate change will not turn a flat space-time into a curved one. You need a non-zero stress-energy tensor to do that.

Ah, that clears it up rather nicely, thanks.

rude man
Homework Helper
Gold Member
PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award
The Sagnac effect is based on General Relativity

No, it isn't; it's present in flat spacetime.

the reasoning is entirely fallacious.

Please show your work. The derivation of the Sagnac effect in flat spacetime is straightforward; even the Wikipedia page gets it right (and references a number of textbooks and papers that give more details).

rude man
Homework Helper
Gold Member
No, it isn't; it's present in flat spacetime.
Please show your work. The derivation of the Sagnac effect in flat spacetime is straightforward; even the Wikipedia page gets it right (and references a number of textbooks and papers that give more details).
The Sagnac effect is a phase shift observed between two beams of light traversing in opposite directions the same closed path around a rotating object. A description of this experiment is obtained within the context of general relativity. In this context the effect provides an operational definition of rotation. An expression for the magnitude of the phase shift is derived under fairly general conditions. The general definition of rotation provided by this experiment is shown to reduce, in certain particular cases, to the usual definitions available. It is observed that the Sagnac effect represents a gravitational analog of the Aharanov−Bohm effect in electrodynamics.

© 1975 American Institute of Physics

PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award
A description of this experiment is obtained within the context of general relativity.

You're not claiming that the experiment can be described using general relativity. You're claiming that the experiment can only be described using general relativity, which is claiming that the effect is not present in flat spacetime. That is a much stronger claim which you have not justified.

PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award

Last edited:
PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award
The Sagnac effect is a phase shift observed between two beams of light traversing in opposite directions the same closed path around a rotating object.

This description, as it stands, is ambiguous. Take the example of a ring laser gyro. By "closed path around a rotating object", do you mean that light beams travel in opposite directions around the ring, which is itself rotating? (In this case, no other objects of significance would be present.) Or do you mean that light beams travel in opposite directions around the ring, which is not itself rotating, but which has a rotating massive object at its center?

rude man
Homework Helper
Gold Member
You're not claiming that the experiment can be described using general relativity. You're claiming that the experiment can only be described using general relativity, which is claiming that the effect is not present in flat spacetime. That is a much stronger claim which you have not justified.

Oh, thank you.

From the French Wikipedie: http://www.ecoresults.info/search.p...000000;GFNT:0000FF;GIMP:0000FF;FORID:11&hl=en

"… On the contrary, since this emitter-receptor is in rotation, its reference is no longer inertial and therefore special relativity does not permit the direct determination of the observed shift."

And:

In employing general relativity one finds a shift ….

I worked in Honeywell's world-leading FOG program for over 20 years and can promise you I read that fact in English also, just don't have access to those papers any more.

So it would seem that the French wikipedie is somewhat better informed than the English wikipedia.

rude man
Homework Helper
Gold Member
This description, as it stands, is ambiguous. Take the example of a ring laser gyro. By "closed path around a rotating object", do you mean that light beams travel in opposite directions around the ring, which is itself rotating? (In this case, no other objects of significance would be present.) Or do you mean that light beams travel in opposite directions around the ring, which is not itself rotating, but which has a rotating massive object at its center?
If you need more info on the FOG there are lots of papers available on the Web. And I assume you know that the ring laser gyro operates on the Sagnac principle also.

PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award
I assume you know that the ring laser gyro operates on the Sagnac principle also.

Yes, of course. Nobody is questioning that the Sagnac effect exists or that ring laser gyros use it. What I am questioning is your claim that GR is required to explain it. The sources you give only show that GR can be used to explain it--and even here your claim is not based on the actual content of the sources you have given, but simply on the fact that they use the words "general relativity" in various places. That is not a valid argument.

What you need to do is show, based on the actual content of these papers, that they use curved spacetime in their models, since the use of curved spacetime is the key content that distinguishes GR from SR. You have not done this. In fact, the quotes you do give from your sources indicate that they, like you, are confused on this point. For example:

"… On the contrary, since this emitter-receptor is in rotation, its reference is no longer inertial and therefore special relativity does not permit the direct determination of the observed shift."

This claim is simply false. Using a non-inertial frame in flat spacetime is still SR. A rotating frame in flat spacetime is still SR. And the Sagnac effect can be predicted using exactly these tools (though they are not needed to make the prediction--see below).

What's more, the apparent implication of the above quote that the Sagnac effect cannot be derived using an inertial frame in flat spacetime (which would unproblematically be "special relativity" even by their definition) is also false. Deriving the prediction of a phase shift using an inertial frame is simple; as I said in a previous post, even the Wikipedia page on the Sagnac effect does it. (It's true that the motion of the emitter-receptor in the ring laser is not inertial, but non-inertial motion of objects does not require a non-inertial frame to describe it.) This clearly shows that "special relativity", even by the strictest possible definition of that term, can explain the Sagnac effect, contrary to your claim that GR is required to do so.

Last edited:
Mentz114
PeterDonis
Mentor
2020 Award
Thread closed again for moderation. rude man, if you want to discuss further, please PM me.