Velocity of Light in Accelerating Spaceship & Inertial Frames in GR

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ratzinger
  • Start date Start date
Ratzinger
Messages
291
Reaction score
0
1.What happens to the velocity of light measured by a spaceship that is in accelerating motion away from the light source ( light source and spaceship on the x-line)?

2. Inertial frames are only defined locally in GR. That means the falling elevator has to be small. But I think local also means just for short amount time. Why is that? Why local in time?

thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
An event is by definition a point in Minkowski space-time. The elevator at some height above the ground whilst accelerating is an event that occurs at a point in time. Something that lasts a period of time consists of a set of events. Events have to be local in time and space. That and space-time in GR is a pesudo-Riemannian manifold, where the curvature is not limited to merely space but time also, and so the time measured in some extended non-local region will differ to that in a local frame of reference.
 
Question 1: The accelerating spaceship is no different than a local G field. SR presupposes that at any instant photons will always be measured to pass the ship at a measured velocity c - but there will be a frequency shift just as there would be if the spaceship were standing still in a comparable G field.

Guestion 2 - In a G field the acceleration increases as the object moves closer, so any measurements must be made in a short amount of time because the G potential is continually changing
 
Ratzinger said:
1.What happens to the velocity of light measured by a spaceship that is in accelerating motion away from the light source ( light source and spaceship on the x-line)?
It will always be c.

Incidentally, if the spaceship is unformly accelerating for all eternity, it will observe the frequency of the light constantly decreasing towards zero. It will only receive a finite amount of the light transmitted by the source.

(Analysis done in SR)



Ratzinger said:
2. Inertial frames are only defined locally in GR. That means the falling elevator has to be small. But I think local also means just for short amount time. Why is that? Why local in time?
For the same reason local in space: "negligible" effects accumulate and become non-negligible over an extended period of time.
 
thanks!

but...

In a G field the acceleration increases as the object moves closer, so any measurements must be made in a short amount of time because the G potential is continually changing

The field is getting stronger the closer the elevator gets to the planet surface. So that alone makes the field inhomogeneous and spacetime curved ( very slightly) and necessitates a very small elevators also to exist only for short times in order to be inertial?

A gravity field had not to vary with direction (as for spherical mass objects) and not to fall off with distance to allow 'more' global inertial frames free falling in it. Or not?
 
Hello?!

I'm still not fully clear why also time needs to be local if already space is local. Why the elevator is required to be small and to exist only for short times.

Any input is apreciated.

thanks
 
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
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