Idunno
- 42
- 1
Thanks everybody! :) Is there an easy way to calculate the spring extension when you use Einstein's elevator? Or is that pretty involved?
Last edited:
Ok, draw your diagrams. What you get is an hyperbola in the t-x plane for the stationary observer and another one in 3D space not belonging in any of the t-x, t-y or x-y planes. Uniform acceleration didn't you say? Right, now measure the radius of curvature of your two hyperbolas and find them to be constant and equal. Next, measure the magnitude of your 3-acceleration vectors and find them to be constant and equal. Who cares in which direction your vectors point at? Who cares in which direction your elevator floor is pointing at, or if its shape is cubic or parallelepiped? (Put a wedge shaped object on the floor to make it level and stand on it, to do your experiments!). You have found constant and equal in magnitude acceleration in both frames and that's exactly the measurement of the extension of your spring and that's equal in both frames, and regardless of the direction of motion of your second elevator with respect to the first, up or down, to and fro in any frame...pervect said:I suspect we're analyzing the same problem, and you're just not getting the point of what I was trying to say. I can see where it might be difficult to follow, but I'm not sure how to resolve the issue. I'd normaly suggest drawing a space-time diagram, but aside from the usual resistance in getting people to either draw their own space-time diagrams or look at space-time diagrams that others have drawn, one would need a 3-d diagram. One needs a time axis, an acceleration axis (the z-axis in my own thoughts), and another axis for superman to fly along (the x-axis, in my thoughts) that's perpendicular to the acceleration axis, to fully depict the problem.
The end result, though, is that one does not wind up with two elevators with parallel floors. Your intuition that it does is leading you astray here.
Idunno said:Thanks everybody! :) Is there an easy way to calculate the spring extension when you use Einstein's elevator? Or is that pretty involved?
In infinitesimal small durations there is always one inertial frame, which momentarily has the same velocity as the accelerated body, and in which the Lorentz transformation holds. The corresponding three-acceleration ain these frames can be directly measured by an accelerometer, and is called proper acceleration![]()
Oh , yes please do so, for the elevator example that you have given us and please announce the results!pervect said:I'm reluctant to do a 4-vector treatment if it isn't of interest, I'm also reluctant to try to stumble through a 3-vector treatment.
dagmar said:Next, measure the magnitude of your 3-acceleration vectors and find them to be constant and equal. Who cares in which direction your vectors point at?
dagmar said:I am repeating what I have just said: Since when, and in what possible way the phenomena observed in a closed elevator that undergoes constant acceleration g with initial velocity=0, will be any different than those in another elevator that begins to accelerate constantly ( same g in magnitude and direction ) with initial velocity v?
dagmar said:Please do not lead the OP astray, by altering the meanings of the words that you've just written firstly, and by passing from idealized examples to real world situations secondly
dagmar said:Oh , yes please do so, for the elevator example that you have given us and please announce the results!
PeterDonis said:It might not make a difference to the extension of the spring
dagmar said:What you get is an hyperbola in the t-x plane for the stationary observer and another one in 3D space not belonging in any of the t-x, t-y or x-y planes. Uniform acceleration didn't you say? Right, now measure the radius of curvature of your two hyperbolas and find them to be constant and equal. Next, measure the magnitude of your 3-acceleration vectors and find them to be constant and equal.
They're equal..It's not a Rindler universe.PeterDonis said:o briefly summarize the key point of the analysis in the previous thread that @pervect linked to: the radius of curvature in spacetime of the two hyperbolas (aka the path curvature, aka the proper acceleration) is in fact not equal. Both accelerations are uniform (the same everywhere on each worldline), but they are not equal; Superman's is higher.
dagmar said:It's not a Rindler universe.
dagmar said:Constant acceleration everywhere we said.
dagmar said:In the meantime re-think your examples and don't be so rash.
Good. Be happy. Your analysis is irrelevant to me and to anyone who understands Physics for that matter.PeterDonis said:You should take your own advice. I don't have to re-think anything; @pervect already posted a link to a previous thread where this problem was analyzed. Please read it when you get a chance.
You are missing the point. The point is that, contrary to your assertion in #39, Superman's proper acceleration is different from the one of Green Lantern. This is easy to show just using basic 4-vector analysis, as done in @pervect's post, and the result is that they differ by a factor ##\gamma^2##, where the ##\gamma## is computed using the velocity of Superman in Green Lantern's instantaneous rest frame. Both have constant proper acceleration but your assertion that these proper accelerations are equal is just wrong.dagmar said:If you believe that the spacetime direction of the 4-acceleration vector matters it is your problem. If you believe that the orientation of the walls of an elevator in regard to the outcomes of an experiment matter, it is your problem. The spatial vector of the acceleration in @pervect's example points always at the same direction and that's exactly what your spring's extension is measuring.
I suggest you stop the ad hominem argumentation and show your maths to make it clear exactly what you are doing as your argumentation is unclear.dagmar said:And what do you think you're doing by using Rindler worldlines to describe motion in an everywhere perfectly uniform grav. field like that of the elevator example in question??
No, everywhere at each point around your elevator thought experiment, acceleration stays the same in magnitude and direction ( its spatial vector part ). Just draw
the worldlines in a simple spacetime diagram and forget about it. Like I said there are simple hyperbolas with constant curvature everywhere.
You are wrong if you are thinking that you're going to cover up your mistakes by twisting a simple elevator example into something so complex like the real grav. field of a planet. Sorry.
dagmar said:Your analysis is irrelevant to me
Idunno said:Is this right?
Idunno said:OK, I hope I have this straight, so, if one were to blindly apply the SR mass equation, one would get that ##Weight =m_0g\gamma = \frac {m_0g} {\sqrt{1 -\frac{v^2}{c^2}}}## This is wrong, of course.
However, Pervect is saying that, using Einstein's elevator, ##Weight =m_0g\gamma^2 = \frac {m_0g} {1 -\frac{v^2}{c^2}}## If I am interpreting his past posts correctly and getting his symbols right, Is this right?
Shouldn't the vertical motion of the elevator be slowed down according an observer that observes an elevator that has lot of horizontal speed? (Compared to an observer that is glued on the elevator floor)pervect said:OK, here's the super simple version involving the notion of a "dropped mass" style of accelerometer. These are commonly used as "absolute" gravimeters.. It gets the right answer, but it's not very rigorous, I have some concenrs in that regard.
Before we get into this, though, I want to point out that the "dropped mass" in this case is just an instantaneously co-moving inertial observer. The observer on the elevator, and also Superman, are accelerating. The "dropped test mass" is moving inertially.
If we consider an instantaneously co-moving observer who starts out "at rest" with respect to the elevator floor, they will see the elevator accelerate away from them , to a high degree of precision obeying the Newtonian law s = 1/2 a t^2, where a is the acceleration of the elevator. If they watch long enough, eventually the elevator will reach relativistic velocities and we'd need to do a relativistic analysis, but if we consider short time periods this is not necessary.
So if the acceleration, a, of the elevevator is 32 feet/sec^2 (1 gravity), at t = 1 second, s = 16 feet.
The accelerating observer at rest on the elevator floor will see essentially the same thing as their associated instantaneously co-moving inertial observer.
Now let's consider Superman's point of view. Superman also has an instantaneously co-moving observer. Superman and that observer both share essentially the same inertial frame of reference, which is different from the frame of reference of the elevator floor. Due to time dilation, the moving observer's clocks will run slower by the factor gamma. So 1 second on the stationary observers clock is only 1/2 a second on the moving clock, if we assume the gamma factor is 2. This means the elevator accelerates away from the moving observer by 16 feet in 1/2 second. Plugging that into s=1/2 a t^2, the moving observer computes that the elevator is accelerating away at 4 gravities. When we generalize this to a general factor of gamma , we see that the acceleration went up by a factor of gamma^2.
Thus superman (and the instantaneously inertial observer co-moving with him) sees the elevator's acceleration as ##\gamma^2 a##.
Lorentz contraction doesn't have any effect on the analysis, the distances are measured perpendicularly to the direction of motion.
The issue that I'm concerned with is to justify how we can ignore the relativity of simultaneity.
pervect said:The issue that I'm concerned with is to justify how we can ignore the relativity of simultaneity.
Thanks a bunch everyone, I think I understand all this much better now, for whatever that's worth. :)PeterDonis said:Yes, but it's important to understand why. It's not because the mass of the object on the end of the spring increases (by a factor ##\gamma##). It's because the proper acceleration of the object on the end of the spring increases (by a factor ##\gamma^2##). In other words, the moving object has to accelerate harder than the stationary object. (Note also that this all assumes that both objects stay at a constant height above the floor of Green Lantern's elevator, as seen in Green Lantern's frame.)
To put it another way, for both objects, ##W = m_0 a##, where ##W## is weight, ##m_0## is rest mass, and ##a## is proper acceleration. But for the stationary object, ##a = g##, while for the moving object, ##a = \gamma^2 g##.