Time slows down at lower gravitational potential

Click For Summary
Time does indeed slow down at lower gravitational potential, as indicated by the comparison of time intervals measured by clocks at different potentials. The discussion highlights that while special relativity suggests that moving clocks run slower relative to stationary ones, general relativity asserts that a clock at a lower potential is slower for both observers involved. In curved spacetime, the relationship between coordinate time and local clock time is complex, and Schwarzschild coordinates allow for meaningful comparisons of clock rates at different altitudes. However, caution is advised when applying formulas directly, as they may overlook necessary steps in the calculations. Overall, the interpretation of time dilation in gravitational fields aligns with established principles of relativity.
guv
Messages
122
Reaction score
22
Homework Statement
According to Schwarzschild solution (see the formula) the time interval is less than the time interval at a greater distance (higher potential).
Relevant Equations
##d\tau^2 = (1 - \frac{R_S}{R}) d t^2##
Common interpretation is that time slows down at lower potential. I wonder if people are simply saying for the time interval between two events at lower potential, it's smaller than what would be measured at greater potential ##d \tau < d t##. i.e. Clock at lower potential shows a time interval 10 seconds, while clock at greater potential shows a time interval 20 seconds. This is similar to the special relativistic effect 'moving clock runs slower' where the clock that is moving measures 10 seconds for the interval but the stationary clock measures 20 seconds for the same interval. Is the above interpretation correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes. But SR says relativity, i.e. A’s clock is slow for B, B’s clock is slow for A. GR says A’s clock is slower than B’s for the both A and B.
 
guv said:
Is the above interpretation correct?
Sort of. In curved spacetime it is very common that a change of time coordinate from ##t## to ##t+dt## does not correspond to an elapsed time ##dt## on a local clock. The formula you quote tells you how to translate a lapse of coordinate time ##dt## into the time ##d\tau## measured by a clock at rest in those coordinates.

Schwarzschild spacetime is a static spacetime, meaning that it is possible to find a definition of "space" that doesn't change with the corresponding notion of "time". Schwarzschild coordinates use this notion, so they provide a meaningful way to compare the rates of separated clocks: calculate ##d\tau|_{r=r_1}## and ##d\tau|_{r=r_2}## and take the ratio. And yes, you'll find that in the time it takes a clock to tick once, a higher altitude clock will tick once and a bit.

If you see someone using that formula directly to calculate time dilation they are abusing it slightly. They're actually comparing ##d\tau|_{r=r_1}## to ##d\tau|_{r=\infty}## and skipping a couple of steps since the latter is equal to ##dt##.
 
Last edited:
I want to find the solution to the integral ##\theta = \int_0^{\theta}\frac{du}{\sqrt{(c-u^2 +2u^3)}}## I can see that ##\frac{d^2u}{d\theta^2} = A +Bu+Cu^2## is a Weierstrass elliptic function, which can be generated from ##\Large(\normalsize\frac{du}{d\theta}\Large)\normalsize^2 = c-u^2 +2u^3## (A = 0, B=-1, C=3) So does this make my integral an elliptic integral? I haven't been able to find a table of integrals anywhere which contains an integral of this form so I'm a bit stuck. TerryW

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
653
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
6K
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
495
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K