Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB

Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB Notes on Relativity and Cosmology - Physics Department, UCSB

web.physics.ucsb.edu
from web.physics.ucsb.edu More from this publisher
27.09.2014 Views

64 CHAPTER 3. EINSTEIN AND INERTIAL FRAMES B simultaneous frame A frame in which A happens first In this case we say that they are timelike related. Note that the following things are true in this case: a) There is an inertial observer who moves through both events and whose speed in the original frame is less than that of light. b) All inertial observers agree on which event (A or B) happened first. c) As a result, we can meaningfully speak of, say, event A being to the past of event B. case 3) A and B are on each other’s light cones. In this case we say that they are lightlike related. Again, all inertial observers agree on which event happened first and we can meaningfully speak of one of them being to the past of the other. Now, why did we consider only inertial frames with relative speeds less than c? Suppose for the moment that our busy friend (the inertial observer) could in fact travel at v > c (i.e., faster than light) as shown below at left. I have marked two events, A and B that occur on her worldline. In our frame event A occurs first. However, the two events are spacelike related. Thus, there is another inertial frame (t other , x other ) in which B occurs before A as shown below at right. This means that there is some inertial observer (the one whose frame is drawn at right) who would see her traveling backwards in time.

3.5. TIME DILATION 65 x =0 us x = 0 other x = 0 other t other = const friend’s line of simultaneity Us A t = const A B other B t =0 other Worldline moves faster than light This was too weird even for Einstein. After all, if she could turn around, our faster-than-light friend could even carry a message from some observer’s future into that observer’s past. This raises all of the famous ‘what if you killed your grandparents’ scenarios from science fiction fame. The point is that, in relativity, travel faster than light is travel backwards in time. For this reason, let us simply ignore the possibility of such observers for awhile. In fact, we will assume that no information of any kind can be transmitted faster than c. I promise that we will come back to this issue later. The proper place to deal with this turns out to be in chapter 5. x = 0 s t = const other t =0 other C A Me B 3.5 Time Dilation We are beginning to come to terms with simultaneity but, as pointed out earlier, we are still missing important information about how different inertial frames match up. In particular, we still do not know just what value of constant t f the

3.5. TIME DILATION 65<br />

x =0<br />

us<br />

x = 0<br />

other<br />

x = 0<br />

other<br />

t<br />

other<br />

= c<strong>on</strong>st<br />

friend’s line of<br />

simultaneity<br />

Us<br />

A<br />

t = c<strong>on</strong>st<br />

A B other<br />

B<br />

t =0<br />

other<br />

Worldline moves faster than light<br />

This was too weird even for Einstein. After all, if she could turn around, our<br />

faster-than-light friend could even carry a message from some observer’s future<br />

into that observer’s past. This raises all of the famous ‘what if you killed your<br />

gr<strong>and</strong>parents’ scenarios from science ficti<strong>on</strong> fame. The point is that, in relativity,<br />

travel faster than light is travel backwards in time. For this reas<strong>on</strong>, let us simply<br />

ignore the possibility of such observers for awhile. In fact, we will assume that<br />

no informati<strong>on</strong> of any kind can be transmitted faster than c. I promise that we<br />

will come back to this issue later. The proper place to deal with this turns out<br />

to be in chapter 5.<br />

x = 0<br />

s<br />

t<br />

= c<strong>on</strong>st<br />

other<br />

t =0<br />

other<br />

C<br />

A<br />

Me<br />

B<br />

3.5 Time Dilati<strong>on</strong><br />

We are beginning to come to terms with simultaneity but, as pointed out earlier,<br />

we are still missing important informati<strong>on</strong> about how different inertial frames<br />

match up. In particular, we still do not know just what value of c<strong>on</strong>stant t f the

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!