I Time Conundrum: Angel vs Man View

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter fxdung
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
fxdung
Messages
387
Reaction score
23
Consider two clocks in two frames.First time they meet each other and we adjust the index of the needles the same number.After that they move apart each other.If there is an Angel who stands at one clock and observes two clocks.Suppose the Angel directly sees distant clock,but needs not to adjust the time that the light travel from the clock to the eyes of the Angel.What does the Angel see the two clocks?.Does the needles point different or same number in the eyes of the Angel?I think that certainly there is a difference in the eyes of the Angel and the Man.If in the eyes of Angel the two locks point different number then we meet the contradictions because we are freely to choose which clock being in motion.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
He sees the moving clock tick more slowly. He sees the needle of the moving clock point to a smaller number.

If I understand you, you imagine two clocks A and B, and an Angel who stands beside clock A. The other clock, B, moves away from where the Angel and clock A are. You say to imagine that the Angel can read both clocks, instantaneously. Neglect the time it takes for light to travel to him from clock B, that is moving away. Somehow he can tell what clock B says. So at any given moment he can tell what both clocks say.
 
Last edited:
fxdung said:
Suppose the Angel directly sees distant clock,but needs not to adjust the time that the light travel from the clock to the eyes of the Angel.

Special relativity says that this is impossible. It doesn't make sense to state an assumption that is inconsistent with a theory, and then ask what a theory predicts under that assumption.
 
As bcrowell said.

Thread closed.
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Back
Top