The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Is this calculation of simultaneity right?

  • 13 Replies
  • 2257 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline saspinski (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Engineer
    • View Profile
Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« on: 31/01/2018 00:13:07 »
Suppose there is an atom clock in alpha centauri, syncronized to the earth. An observer there could detect now, signals sent from here in jan 2014, considering 4 light years of distance.

A spaceship coming from earth at 0.5c, crosses alpha centauri when the clock at the star shows jan 2018. The corresponding time at earth for the ship is t' = t - vx = t - 0,5 * 4 = jan 2016. An observer in the ship could detect signals sent from here in jan 2012.

A spaceship with the opposite velocity, flying to earth at 0.5c, crosses alpha centauri also when the clock at the star shows jan 2018. The corresponding time at earth for the ship is t' = t + vx = t + 0,5 * 4 = jan 2020. An observer in the ship could detect signals sent from here in jan 2016.

If it is right, there is any intuitive way to realize how that gap of 4 years between the available signals for the ships should happen?  I am always unconsciouly dealing with light speed as a normal material speed, instead of a constant, when I try an intuitive explanation.
Logged
 



Offline Bill S

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3631
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 108 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #1 on: 31/01/2018 13:29:42 »
Saspinski. I'm certainly not the best person to deal with mathematical calculations, but the first thing that comes to mind when reading your post is that you might not have taken the RFs of the different observers into account. 

Hopefully someone better able will come up with an answer, but failing that, I'll see if I can trace my notes from a few years ago, when I wrestled with a similar problem.  Time's limited, though, so don't hold your breath.  :)
Logged
There never was nothing.
 

Offline Janus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 756
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 180 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #2 on: 31/01/2018 17:46:41 »
Quote from: saspinski on 31/01/2018 00:13:07
Suppose there is an atom clock in alpha centauri, syncronized to the earth. An observer there could detect now, signals sent from here in jan 2014, considering 4 light years of distance.
OK
Quote

A spaceship coming from earth at 0.5c, crosses alpha centauri when the clock at the star shows jan 2018. The corresponding time at earth for the ship is t' = t - vx = t - 0,5 * 4 = jan 2016. An observer in the ship could detect signals sent from here in jan 2012.
No.  The light or signals arriving at AC are the same for both the Clock at AC and the ship.  They both, at the moment of passing, detect signals that left Earth in Jan 2014.   
Quote

A spaceship with the opposite velocity, flying to earth at 0.5c, crosses alpha centauri also when the clock at the star shows jan 2018. The corresponding time at earth for the ship is t' = t + vx = t + 0,5 * 4 = jan 2020. An observer in the ship could detect signals sent from here in jan 2016.
Again, this ship would be receiving the same signals from Earth at that moment as AC and the Other ship; those that left Earth in Jan 2014.  All events( such as light carrying a certain bit of information to an observer) must be consistent across all frames of reference.
Space-time diagrams might help. going from left to right we have the Earth_AC frame, the Outbound ship frame, and the inbound ship frame.   Dark Blue is the Earth's world-line, Green AC's, Red the Outbound ship's and Light blue the inbound ship's.  The yellow line is light/signal coming from Earth.

* simul.png (10.64 kB . 932x394 - viewed 2668 times)
Quote

If it is right, there is any intuitive way to realize how that gap of 4 years between the available signals for the ships should happen?  I am always unconsciouly dealing with light speed as a normal material speed, instead of a constant, when I try an intuitive explanation.
Just remember, that in any frame, light will travel at c relative to that frame (this is illustrated by the fact that in all three diagrams above light is drawn at a 45 degree angle).


« Last Edit: 31/01/2018 21:06:54 by Janus »
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: saspinski

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 6807
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 174 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #3 on: 31/01/2018 18:33:38 »
In a vacuum the inertial path of the photon contains the only static anchor points. All observers will agree on its path and location at particular times. The clocks may vary but the photon does not.
Logged
Even the most obstinately ignorant cannot avoid learning when in an environment that educates.
 

Offline saspinski (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Engineer
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #4 on: 01/02/2018 01:56:16 »
Quote from: Janus on 31/01/2018 17:46:41
Just remember, that in any frame, light will travel at c relative to that frame (this is illustrated by the fact that in all three diagrams above light is drawn at a 45 degree angle).

OK, I agree. The signals from earth, recorded in 2018 by all, had being sent in 2014.

What I am trying to understand is the meaning of simultaneity: if on Jan 2016 people at earth observe another ship (lets say from the same fleet) passing by here towards AC, also with v = 0.5c, the ship that is passing by AC on 2018 will take this event as happening now.

So, for the word "now" has any meaning, some information should be recorded by the ship in AC, that was sent 4 years ago.

I believe that the croquis in annex (where only the ship going to AC is represented)  shows what happens: the dashed line is this second ship. The signal from Jan 2012 is sent from it and arrives to AC on Jan 2108, being recorded by the first ship.

* simult.png (13.33 kB, 1112x977 - viewed 171 times.)
Logged
 



Offline petelamana

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 111
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 10 times
  • Sorry I've been away. My dad passed, then my dog.
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #5 on: 08/02/2018 13:37:50 »
I'm stuck with the base supposition.  How could a clock 4-light years distant, be it atomic or anything else, be synchronised with a clock on Earth?  What would "carry" the synchronizing information to the clock in the AC system?  And do so instantly, without any loss of time in the transfer?

When clocks are synchronized there is always a variation in the "time", in most cases imperceivable, but it exists.  So, again, the two clocks would have to be out of sync by however long it takes the synchronizing information to reach the second clock.

However, if a clock could be constructed that utilizes quantum "teleportation", then I suppose two clocks separated by great distances could be synchronized.
« Last Edit: 08/02/2018 13:39:59 by petelamana »
Logged
 

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 3446
  • Activity:
    15.5%
  • Thanked: 428 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #6 on: 08/02/2018 16:17:56 »
Forget distances of 4 light years. How can any two clocks really be synchronized? Even if they are right next to each other. The mechanism of a clock is itself about a light nanosecond across (about 3 mm), so which part tells the "true" time? Also different parts of the clock are in different frames of reference, and may experience time and space dilations relative to each other. Especially if there are any heavy atoms around, like gold or cesium, for which relativistic effects are measurably different for different parts of the atom! How can the universe actually work with all these different frames of reference and timelines?

Well, it does work, somehow. We just get ourselves confused trying to think about it. Relativity, QM, QFT, etc. all have their failings. Hopefully we will get better theories, but I think we are doing pretty well considering we're made of meat!

By the way, welcome to the forum, petelamana! Great questions, keep it up!
« Last Edit: 08/02/2018 16:24:21 by chiralSPO »
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: petelamana

Offline Janus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 756
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 180 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #7 on: 08/02/2018 17:00:27 »
Quote from: petelamana on 08/02/2018 13:37:50
I'm stuck with the base supposition.  How could a clock 4-light years distant, be it atomic or anything else, be synchronised with a clock on Earth?  What would "carry" the synchronizing information to the clock in the AC system?  And do so instantly, without any loss of time in the transfer?

When clocks are synchronized there is always a variation in the "time", in most cases imperceivable, but it exists.  So, again, the two clocks would have to be out of sync by however long it takes the synchronizing information to reach the second clock.

However, if a clock could be constructed that utilizes quantum "teleportation", then I suppose two clocks separated by great distances could be synchronized.
You use the Einstein Synchronization method.   You put a light source halfway between the to clocks, It sends a synchronizing signal to both clocks which tells them to start.  This only has to be done once, as it is assumed that both clocks from then on will remain in sync in their rest frame (in thought experiments, we assume ideal clocks, in real life we would use clocks who's known limits of drift are much smaller than the effect we are attempting to measure. 
Another method is to send a signal from one clock to the other and just account for the distance the signal has to travel. If Clock 1 sends a signal to clock 2 and they are 4 light years apart, then when Clock 2 gets the signal it knows that the light left 4 years ago and can set itself accordingly to sync itself with Clock 1.  The point is that in principle it is possible to sync the clocks exactly in their rest frame and in practice it is possible to sync them close enough that the difference is insignificant to the experiment.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: petelamana

guest4091

  • Guest
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #8 on: 08/02/2018 17:32:16 »
You are measuring a time difference.
The time transformation is t'=g(t-.5x)=1.15(8-2)=6.9.
The ship time would correspond to 2016.9 earth time.
I'll just support the last post by Janus. The earth only has to poll the distant clocks to get a reading, to check for synchronization.
Logged
 



Offline petelamana

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 111
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 10 times
  • Sorry I've been away. My dad passed, then my dog.
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #9 on: 08/02/2018 18:28:08 »
Janus, thank you.  If I may be allowed to expound, and I mean not impertinence.

As I read the first part of your explanation,  "You use the Einstein Synchronization method.   You put a light source halfway between the to clocks, It sends a synchronizing signal to both clocks which tells them to start."  I immediately thought of Zeno's Paradoxes, specifically Dichotomy.  To refresh your memory, Zeno correctly asserts that in order for anything that is in motion from point A to point B it must first achieve the halfway point.  In order for it to make it to the halfway point it must first get to the halfway point of that, or the one-quarter (overall) point, and in order to reach that it must cross the half-way of the halfway of the half-way, or the one-eighth point, and so on.

In a similar fashion, this is the same as folding, or tearing, a piece of paper in half, and then in half again, and so on.  Can you tear the paper in half enough times to make the paper cease to exist?  Obviously, no.

So, back to the Einstein Synchronization method...

Each iteration of the halving of the distance from Earth to AC would cause a time lag.  Not in the halving, but in the fact that the signal still has to travel from one point to another.

Thank you for indulging me. - Pete
Logged
 

Offline saspinski (OP)

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Engineer
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #10 on: 08/02/2018 22:37:29 »
The next mission to Mars could verify the lack of synchronism. After returning to earth, with an average speed of 20000 km/h, and a distance of 55 millions of kilometres, there should be a difference of 0,003 s between previously synchronized clocks. The ship clock behind that one that stayed here.
Logged
 

Offline wolfekeeper

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1380
  • Activity:
    0.5%
  • Thanked: 55 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #11 on: 09/02/2018 00:41:15 »
One interesting thing I worked out a while back, if you move a clock at a very slow speed along a moving object, then you get the same result as the Einstein synchronisation method. The overall sum of the time dilation, does not tend to zero. In fact it depends on the distance and the speed of the object. Indeed, that's where the lack of simultaneity comes from, it's just another effect of time dilation really.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: petelamana

Offline Janus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 756
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 180 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #12 on: 10/02/2018 17:18:40 »
Quote from: petelamana on 08/02/2018 18:28:08
Janus, thank you.  If I may be allowed to expound, and I mean not impertinence.

As I read the first part of your explanation,  "You use the Einstein Synchronization method.   You put a light source halfway between the to clocks, It sends a synchronizing signal to both clocks which tells them to start."  I immediately thought of Zeno's Paradoxes, specifically Dichotomy.  To refresh your memory, Zeno correctly asserts that in order for anything that is in motion from point A to point B it must first achieve the halfway point.  In order for it to make it to the halfway point it must first get to the halfway point of that, or the one-quarter (overall) point, and in order to reach that it must cross the half-way of the halfway of the half-way, or the one-eighth point, and so on.

In a similar fashion, this is the same as folding, or tearing, a piece of paper in half, and then in half again, and so on.  Can you tear the paper in half enough times to make the paper cease to exist?  Obviously, no.

So, back to the Einstein Synchronization method...

Each iteration of the halving of the distance from Earth to AC would cause a time lag.  Not in the halving, but in the fact that the signal still has to travel from one point to another.

Thank you for indulging me. - Pete
Zeno's paradox has no relevance here (besides, it fail to take into account the concept of a "limit".)

There is no series of "dividing in half" involved.  You simply have a light source that is mid way between the clocks you want to synchronize.  It does not matter how you determined the midpoint, You could have stretched a measuring tape between the light source and one clock and then between the light source and the other clock, or used some other method. 
The light then emits one flash which then starts the two clocks, The delay time between the emission of the light and its reception at the clocks is of no matter (you don't even need to know the speed of light for it to work), because it's the fact that the flashes reach both clocks at the same time that is used to synchronize the clocks.  The two clocks involved do not have to communicate with each other at all.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: petelamana



Offline petelamana

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 111
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 10 times
  • Sorry I've been away. My dad passed, then my dog.
    • View Profile
Re: Is this calculation of simultaneity right?
« Reply #13 on: 10/02/2018 17:31:26 »
Thank you, Janus.

I admit that I now see the synchronization of the two clocks more clearly.  For that I am very grateful.

As for Zeno, one of the saddest "non-developments" in history is that he never quite got the limit.  Imagine where the world could be if Zeno had been able to clearly define a limit, 2100 years before Leibnitz? 

Again, thank you for your illumination. - Pete
« Last Edit: 11/02/2018 12:22:08 by petelamana »
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 

Similar topics (5)

Is seeing things in the past a part of simultaneity and relativity?

Started by guest39538Board Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 3
Views: 2641
Last post 22/01/2016 23:04:07
by Space Flow
MOVED: Anyone Familiar with Minguzzi's Simultaneity Method?

Started by Colin2BBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 0
Views: 1575
Last post 18/02/2020 00:00:57
by Colin2B
A Possible Proof that Simultaneity at a Distance is Meaningless?

Started by MikeFontenotBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 3
Views: 531
Last post 21/07/2020 08:53:16
by CPT ArkAngel
Question about the relativity of simultaneity?

Started by EEKBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 0
Views: 1489
Last post 28/11/2015 04:15:23
by EEK
MOVED: What is a new simultaneity method?

Started by Colin2BBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 0
Views: 657
Last post 26/12/2019 22:45:11
by Colin2B
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.158 seconds with 69 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.