Time dilation in a non-inertial reference frame

blueberrynerd
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Hi! :smile: Need some help here. Can we perceive time dilation and length contraction in a non-inertial reference frame? If we observe a reference frame experiencing acceleration close to c, do we see the same effects as in an inertial reference frame?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's lots of ways to perceive time dilation and length contraction in non-inertial reference frames but no standard way like there is for inertial frames and using the Lorentz Transform. Personally, I think they are a waste of time and don't solve any problem but rather create more problems.

Also, what do you mean by acceleration close to c? No matter how much you have accelerated in the past, you're still just as far away from c as you were before you started accelerating. If you mean a constant acceleration maintained for a very long time, you're also getting no closer to c.

Maybe I should ask: what is the problem you are trying to solve?
 
What I was wondering is if time dilation and length contraction are perceived at constant speed in the same way it is perceived at accelerating speeds?
 
blueberrynerd said:
What I was wondering is if time dilation and length contraction are perceived at constant speed in the same way it is perceived at accelerating speeds?

For an inertial observer studying an accelerating object, the time dilation is determined only by the momentary speed of the object. Thus, for a rocket undergoing steady one g acceleration, the inertial observer will see ever increasing time dilation as the speed gets ever closer to c (but never reaches it).

As for what the rocket sees, it is more complex. If the acceleration continues eternally, more and more of the universe becomes invisible as no light from it can catch up with the rocket. This is called a Rindler Horizon.
 
Thanks for the help! :smile:
 
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...
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...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
54
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
87
Views
5K
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
88
Views
7K
Back
Top