Two rings rotating about a common center

In summary, the author suggests that by symmetry, when Matt and Eve's world lines cross, their clocks read the same time. However, they provide two methods, one by symmetry and one that does not rely on symmetry.
  • #1
JD_PM
1,131
158
TL;DR Summary
Problem statement: Two rings rotate with equal and opposite angular (relativistic) velocity about a common center. Matt rides on one ring and Eve on the other and there's a point they meet and their clocks agree. At the moment they pass by one another, each asserts that is the other's clock which is running slow. Show that the next time they meet their clocks agree again.
Problem statement: Two rings rotate with equal and opposite angular (relativistic) velocity about a common center. Matt rides on one ring and Eve on the other and there's a moment they meet and their clocks agree. At the moment they pass by one another, each asserts that is the other's clock which is running slow. Show that the next time they meet their clocks agree again.

I understand that when they say 'there's a moment they meet and their clocks agree' they mean that their proper time is the same (let c=1):

$$d\tau_{M} = d\tau_{E} = dt\sqrt{1-(r\omega)^2}$$

Next time they meet ##d\tau_{M} = d\tau_{E}## is again true so above equation is valid but I think this is not enough to answer the question

Actually my books provides a method that I do not fully understand:

'We could consider a non-inertial coordinate system attached to one of them (let's say to Eve). Then Eve defines a surface of simultaneity by extending hypersurfaces orthogonal to her word line, the distance between hypersurfaces being at equal intervals of her proper time. At points where her hypersurfaces intersect Matt's world line, his proper time ##\tau_{M}## is read off and Eve can compute ##\tau_{E}## as a function of ##\tau_{M}##.

Eve's world line is defined by:

$$t= \gamma \tau_{E}$$
$$x = sin (\omega t) = sin (\omega \gamma \tau_{E})$$
$$y = cos(\omega t) = cos (\omega \gamma \tau_{E})$$
$$z = 0$$

Matt's world line is defined by:

$$t= \gamma \tau_{M}$$
$$x = -sin (\omega t) = sin (\omega \gamma \tau_{M})$$
$$y = cos(\omega t) = cos (\omega \gamma \tau_{M})$$
$$z = 0$$

Then one proceeds by determining the four vector ##w## which connects Eve's and Matt's world lines and which is orthogonal to Eve's 4-velocity.'

Using ##w \cdot u_{E} = 0## condition one gets that ##\tau_{M} = \tau_{E}## when ##sin(2\omega \gamma \tau_{E}) = sin(2\omega t)=0## (which means that whenever their world lines cross you get ##\tau_{E} = \tau_{M}##). Note I have not provided full details on how to get ##sin(2\omega \gamma \tau_{E}) = sin(2\omega t)=0##; I could do so if needed be.

Question:

What does defining a surface of simultaneity by extending hypersurfaces orthogonal to one's world line mean?

I am trying to figure out this method so further questions may be asked.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
The easiest way to prove this is to argue by symmetry. Rotate by 180 degrees about an axis in the plane of the ring. The problem is identical, but you have swapped Matt and Eve. Therefore by symmetry their reading must be identical.
 
  • Like
Likes JD_PM
  • #3
Dale said:
The easiest way to prove this is to argue by symmetry. Rotate by 180 degrees about an axis in the plane of the ring. The problem is identical, but you have swapped Matt and Eve. Therefore by symmetry their reading must be identical.

Yes, I see what you mean. Actually my book provides two methods: by symmetry and the one I have posted.

Now I am trying to understand the later.
 
  • #4
Yes, I am not really convinced by that method. Rotating reference frames are notoriously difficult to do correctly. I suspect that the method they suggest does not lead to a valid coordinate system.
 
  • #5
JD_PM said:
What does defining a surface of simultaneity by extending hypersurfaces orthogonal to one's world line mean?
Sounds like: "Consider a tangent inertial frame at an event on the world line with x=y=z=t=0 at the event. The set of events at t=0 per this frame defines a hypersurface of simultaneity".

This leads to a coordinate system for at least some portion of the region of interest. You get the t coordinate from the simultaneous clock time on the object and x, y and z coordinates per the tangent inertial frame.

If intuition serves, the problems arise far to the outside of the orbital circle where the hypersurfaces of simultaneity might sweep backward in remote proper time, leading to coordinate singularities and events that are multiply mapped by the coordinate system.
 
  • Like
Likes JD_PM
  • #6
If you imagine a (2+1)d Minkowski diagram, Matt and Eve's worldlines are spirals in opposite directions lying in the surface of a cylinder. At any event on Eve's worldline you can draw a plane that is Lorentz-orthogonal to Eve's worldline at that event. That plane intersects Matt's worldline at exactly one event, and ##w## is the straight line in that plane that joins Eve's event to Matt's.

That's what I think the author is describing. However, (s)he appears to be finding ##w## by letting it be a line between some chosen event on Eve's worldline and then choosing an event on Matt's worldline such that ##w## is orthogonal to Eva's four velocity. As others have commented, I'm not at all sure that the coordinate system implied by the description is valid - but the specified line does exist. Although it's not well defined when the worldlines cross.

The method seems enormously over-complicated. You just need to equate the coordinate expressions to find the events where they meet and then solve for the proper times. In fact, in this case, equating the two coordinate time expressions gives you that ##\tau_E=\tau_M## at all times (including the meetups) in this frame. That won't hold so generally in other frames, but must be true at the meetups because they are single events.
 
  • Like
Likes JD_PM
  • #7
jbriggs444 said:
Sounds like: "Consider a tangent inertial frame at an event on the world line with x=y=z=t=0 at the event. The set of events at t=0 per this frame defines a hypersurface of simultaneity".

Thanks for your clarification.

Does tangent inertial frame imply that the world line of (let's say) Eve is orthogonal to the set of events at ##t=0##?
 
  • #8
Ibix said:
At any event on Eve's worldline you can draw a plane that is Lorentz-orthogonal to Eve's worldline at that event.

Mathematically we can express that condition as ##w \cdot u_{E} = 0##, isn't it?
 
  • #9
Ibix said:
The method seems enormously over-complicated.

I agree. However, for fun's sake, I am studying it. Let me post both the exercise and solution (note we're dealing with the second method):

FullSizeRender (44).jpg

FullSizeRender (45).jpg

FullSizeRender (46).jpg

FullSizeRender (47).jpg

FullSizeRender (48).jpg
 
  • #10
I don't see a metric or line element for the "non-inertial" coordinates they are using. They seem to be assuming the coordinates they describe are well defined, but they haven't really demonstrated existence or uniqueness. The last is probably my biggest concern.

Considering simpler examples of accelerated coordinate systems such as the Rindler coordinates, we'd expect that their coordinate system woudln't cover all of space-time, but they don't address that issue at all.

[add]In the case of the simpler, Rindler spacetime of an observer accelerating along one axis in a space time at a constant proper acceleration, the problems with the coordinates (for instance singularities in the metric where ##g_{tt}## vanishes) show up at or near the points where the assignment of the time coordinate becomes non-unique.
 
Last edited:

1. What is the concept of two rings rotating about a common center?

The concept of two rings rotating about a common center refers to the motion of two circular objects rotating around a single point or axis. This can occur in various scenarios, such as two gears meshing together or two planets orbiting around a star.

2. How does the rotation of the two rings affect each other?

The rotation of the two rings affects each other through the transfer of angular momentum. As one ring rotates, it exerts a force on the other ring, causing it to also rotate. This can result in synchronized rotation or a change in the rotation speed of one or both rings.

3. What factors determine the speed and direction of rotation for the two rings?

The speed and direction of rotation for the two rings are determined by several factors, including the mass and size of the rings, the distance between them, and the force or torque applied to them. These factors can also change over time, resulting in changes in the rotation of the rings.

4. Can the two rings rotate in opposite directions?

Yes, the two rings can rotate in opposite directions around a common center. This is known as counter-rotation and can occur when the rings have different sizes or when external forces act on them in opposite directions.

5. What are some real-world examples of two rings rotating about a common center?

Some real-world examples of two rings rotating about a common center include the gears in a clock, the planets in our solar system orbiting around the sun, and the moons orbiting around a planet. This concept is also used in various mechanical and engineering systems, such as turbines and propellers.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
75
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
81
Views
3K
  • Linear and Abstract Algebra
Replies
4
Views
928
Replies
2
Views
815
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
17
Views
278
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
738
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
268
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
2K
Back
Top