Time Dilation: Lorentz Transf. & Proper Time Equations

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of time dilation as described by the Lorentz transformation and proper time equations in the context of special relativity. Participants explore the implications of these equations and their interpretations regarding the measurements of time by moving and stationary observers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the relationship between the Lorentz transformation and proper time, questioning how proper time can be less than the time measured by a stationary observer.
  • Another participant asks for clarification on the conclusion reached regarding time dilation, suggesting that using the relationship x=vt might yield consistent results with the earlier findings.
  • A participant points out that if the moving clock reads less time, it implies that it is running slower, which raises questions about the terminology of dilation.
  • Some participants acknowledge their confusion and express gratitude for the discussion, indicating a shared learning experience.
  • A suggestion is made to focus on the spacetime interval and diagrams as a clearer approach to understanding special relativity, while dismissing more complex explanations involving "shrinking" rods and trains.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit uncertainty and confusion regarding the interpretation of time dilation and proper time, with no consensus reached on the implications of the equations discussed.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing assumptions and potential misunderstandings regarding the definitions of proper time and time dilation, as well as the implications of the Lorentz transformation.

Dyatlov
Messages
25
Reaction score
1
Hello!
Got a bit of an issue with thew two above mentioned equations about time.
From the Lorentz transformation t' = [t - (vx)/c^2]/lorentz factor, we get that the time read by a moving observer for an event in the stationary observer's frame of reference will always be slower (longer) because the denominator will always make the nominator grow when v < c.
Here comes proper time: t’^2- x’^2 = t^2 – x^2. From the moving observer frame of reference (x' = 0) we will get: t’^2= t^2 – x^2; t’^2 = t^2 – (vt)^2;t ’^2= t^2[1 – (v/c)^2]. Here comes the confusing part. This last equation reads that the proper time read by the moving observer for an event in the stationary frame, will be less than the proper time that the stationary observer is reading by a factor of [1 – (v/c)^2]. How can it be less? I thought no matter what frame of reference you relate to, you will always see another observer with dilated time.
Am I mixing things? Proper time is the time measured by a clock moving with the frame of reference, so by definition this time should always be the longest, which would mean the last equation makes sense.
Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dyatlov said:
Hello!
Got a bit of an issue with thew two above mentioned equations about time.
From the Lorentz transformation t' = [t - (vx)/c^2]/lorentz factor, we get that the time read by a moving observer for an event in the stationary observer's frame of reference will always be slower (longer) because the denominator will always make the nominator grow when v < c.
Can you elaborate how you're reaching your conclusion? If you use x=vt, don't you get the same result as the one you found below?

Here comes proper time: t’^2- x’^2 = t^2 – x^2. From the moving observer frame of reference (x' = 0) we will get: t’^2= t^2 – x^2; t’^2 = t^2 – (vt)^2;t ’^2= t^2[1 – (v/c)^2]. Here comes the confusing part. This last equation reads that the proper time read by the moving observer for an event in the stationary frame, will be less than the proper time that the stationary observer is reading by a factor of [1 – (v/c)^2]. How can it be less? I thought no matter what frame of reference you relate to, you will always see another observer with dilated time.
If the moving clock reads less, doesn't that mean it's running slower—that is, it's dilated?

Am I mixing things? Proper time is the time measured by a clock moving with the frame of reference, so by definition this time should always be the longest, which would mean the last equation makes sense.
Thanks in advance.
 
vela said:
If the moving clock reads less, doesn't that mean it's running slower—that is, it's dilated?
And dilation means "getting bigger", so it's a very misleading term indeed.
 
Yes, that was where my confusion was coming from. Thanks.
 
Dyatlov said:
Yes, that was where my confusion was coming from. Thanks.
As a fellow learner I would advise sticking rigidly to the spacetime interval and diagrams (which you seem OK with). It's the simplest, most direct approach to SR. Then you can just let your eyes glaze over and pretend not to understand (like I do) when folks go off an a tangent talking about "shrinking" rods and trains with their ends measured at different times, or time intervals between two different places ;)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and Dyatlov

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K