Two Laser Emissions: Resolving Contradiction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Whatifitaint
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Emissions Laser
Whatifitaint
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I can't figure this out.

Say 2 frames are in relative motion. When the origins at at the same place, 2 lasers shoot up the positive x-axis and negative x axis. Let's call the 2 frames F and F'. F says the lasers will always hit simultaneous events along the x-axis. Then by the relativity of simultaneity F says the lasers for F' will never cause simultaneous events. But, F. says the lasers always cause simultaneous events along its x axis.

So, how is this resolved that special relativity says F' will never see simultaneous events by F but F' says it always see simultaneous events?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Whatifitaint said:
Say 2 frames are in relative motion. When the origins at at the same place, 2 lasers shoot up the positive x-axis and negative x axis.

So, just to be clear, the lasers only fire once each, and the event at which they both fire is the event at which the origins of both frames are co-located? I'll assume that this is correct in what follows.

Whatifitaint said:
F says the lasers will always hit simultaneous events along the x-axis.

Yes.

Whatifitaint said:
Then by the relativity of simultaneity F says the lasers for F' will never cause simultaneous events.

No, that's not quite correct. What F can say, by relativity of simultaneity, is that the pairs of events on the x-axis that he considers simultaneous are not simultaneous for F'. However, there will be *other* pairs of events on the x' axis (which is spatially the same as the x axis) that are simultaneous for F' but not for F.

If the above still isn't clear, I recommend drawing a spacetime diagram of the scenario.
 
Whatifitaint said:
I can't figure this out.

Say 2 frames are in relative motion. When the origins at at the same place, 2 lasers shoot up the positive x-axis and negative x axis. Let's call the 2 frames F and F'. F says the lasers will always hit simultaneous events along the x-axis. Then by the relativity of simultaneity F says the lasers for F' will never cause simultaneous events. But, F. says the lasers always cause simultaneous events along its x axis.

So, how is this resolved that special relativity says F' will never see simultaneous events by F but F' says it always see simultaneous events?

Here's a spacetime diagram depicting your scenario for frame F. Note the pairs of events with the same color:

attachment.php?attachmentid=63095&stc=1&d=1382164683.png

Now I transform the coordinates of the events to frame F' moving at 0.6c with respect to frame F:

attachment.php?attachmentid=63096&stc=1&d=1382164683.png


Now you can see that none of the pairs of same-colored simultaneous events from frame F are simultaneous in frame F' but there are other pairs of events that are simultaneous in frame F' but they won't be simultaneous if frame F.

For example, in frame F' (the bottom diagram), the green event on the left beam is simultaneous with the black event on the right beam but these two events are not simultaneous in frame F.

Does that help?
 

Attachments

  • TwoBeams1.PNG
    TwoBeams1.PNG
    2.6 KB · Views: 464
  • TwoBeams2.PNG
    TwoBeams2.PNG
    3.3 KB · Views: 469
Last edited:
PeterDonis said:
So, just to be clear, the lasers only fire once each, and the event at which they both fire is the event at which the origins of both frames are co-located? I'll assume that this is correct in what follows.



Yes.



No, that's not quite correct. What F can say, by relativity of simultaneity, is that the pairs of events on the x-axis that he considers simultaneous are not simultaneous for F'. However, there will be *other* pairs of events on the x' axis (which is spatially the same as the x axis) that are simultaneous for F' but not for F.

If the above still isn't clear, I recommend drawing a spacetime diagram of the scenario.

Oh, so F says his pairs of simultaneous events will not be simultaneous for F', but F' will be seeing its own simultaneous pairs of events at any given time. I think that is what both you and ghwellsjr are saying.

Say then that we put F and F' frame observers at A1 and A2 , |A1|=|A2| F frame coordinates.

F observers say these events are simultaneous and the F' observers say they are not.

Is this all correct?
 
Whatifitaint said:
Oh, so F says his pairs of simultaneous events will not be simultaneous for F', but F' will be seeing its own simultaneous pairs of events at any given time. I think that is what both you and ghwellsjr are saying.

Say then that we put F and F' frame observers at A1 and A2 , |A1|=|A2| F frame coordinates.

F observers say these events are simultaneous and the F' observers say they are not.

Is this all correct?
I don't know what you are asking. F and F' are frames, not observers. the coordinates of frames determine simultaneity. Observers are unaware of the coordinates unless they do a lot of work.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
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...
Back
Top