A Why is Tau-AB^2 not t^2 + x^2?

BLevine1985
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
question about proof page 21
why is Tau-AB^2 equal to t^2 - x^2 ?It seems it should be t^2 + x^2 according to the geometry of the diagram...
 

Attachments

  • Gravitation.png
    Gravitation.png
    20.3 KB · Views: 119
Physics news on Phys.org
BLevine1985 said:
why is Tau-AB^2 equal to t^2 - x^2 ?
Because that's how the metric is defined in an inertial frame in special relativity.

BLevine1985 said:
It seems it should be t^2 + x^2 according to the geometry of the diagram...
No, because the diagram is not depicting a Euclidean geometry. It's depicting a Minkowskian geoemetry. That means you cannot interpret lines and angles in the diagram as if they were Euclidean; they aren't.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes vanhees71, malawi_glenn, topsquark and 1 other person
Thank you. That was very helpful!
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and berkeman
BLevine1985 said:
Thank you. That was very helpful!
You're welcome!

Also, welcome to PF!
 

Thread 'Question about Parallel Transport'

In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
View full post »

Thread 'Trying to calculate proper time of worldlines using rotating frames'

So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
View full post »

Thread 'Describing the Big Bang'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

A Weinberg's proof of ##{T^{\mu\nu}}_{,\nu}=0## for a perfect fluid
Replies
2
Views
207
I Compute Gradient in GR: Step-by-Step Guide
Replies
3
Views
1K
I What Is the Proper Time in Curved Space?
Replies
48
Views
5K
A Ricci tensor for Fermi normal coordinates
Replies
1
Views
789
I Proper Acceleration: Why d^2x^α/dτ^2 is Not Ideal
Replies
12
Views
1K
B Metric Line Element Use: Do's & Don'ts for Accelerated Dummies?
Replies
29
Views
2K
A Two Questions about Novikov Coordinates
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Coordinate transformations in GR
Replies
29
Views
4K
I Uncovering a Decent Proof of E=mc^2
Replies
14
Views
2K
I Co-Moving Coordinates & Lapse Function N(t) in ADM Decomposition
Replies
8
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top