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: 466
  • TwoBeams2.PNG
    TwoBeams2.PNG
    3.3 KB · Views: 470
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.
 
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...
Back
Top