Another relativity check please.

  • Thread starter rede96
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Relativity
In summary, three space ships, A, B and C, are at rest with each other, with A and C being 100 million km apart and B in the middle at 60 million km from A. A 300 million km long fiber optic cable is coiled up in ship A, and ship B is used to feed one end of the cable through and attach it to ship C. When ship A sends a light pulse through the cable, it takes 1,000 seconds to reach ship C and 866.6 seconds to be detected by ship B. Ship A also sends a light beam directly to ship B at the same time. When ship C accelerates away at a constant velocity of 0.75c, the
  • #1
rede96
663
16
Suppose there are three space ships in a line, A, B and C each at rest wrt each other. Ship A is 100 million km from ship C and ship B is roughly in the middle, 60 million km from ship A.

There is a really long fibre optic cable coiled up in ship A, which we'll say is 300 million km long.

We use a forth ship to feed one end of the cable through ship B, and then attach it to ship C.

So there is 100 million km of cable between ship A and ship C, which passes through ship B and 200 million km of cable left on ship A.

Ship A sends a light pulse through the cable. Assuming 300,000 km/s for c, and that the light pulse would travel at c in the cable, it would take 1,000 seconds for the light pulse to travel the length of the cable and reach ship C and approximately 866.6 seconds for it be detected by ship B, as there is 260 million km of cable between ship B and ship A.

Ship A also sends a light beam directly to ship B at the same time it sends the pulse through the cable (Same time from ship A’s frame.)

So ship B would detect the light beam after 200 seconds and would then detect the light pulse in the cable 666.6 seconds later.

Ok so far I hope.

Ship C, where the other end of the cable is attached, now instantly accelerates away to a constant velocity of 0.75c, pulling the cable with it from ship A.

Just at the point where there is exactly 60 million km of cable left between ship A and ship B (the exact distance between them.) ship A sends a final light pulse through the cable just before it is pulled loose. Also at the same time it sends a light beam to ship B. (Same time from ship A’s frame.)

As ship A and ship B are still at rest wrt each other, the light beam still takes 200 seconds to reach ship B.

However, as the light pulse is traveling in the cable, and the cable is now traveling at 0.75c wrt to ship A and ship B, does that mean that the light pulse is closing the gap at a rate of 1.75c wrt to ship B and thus wouldn’t the light pulse arrive at ship B before the light beam?
If so, then ship A has sent information to ship B quicker than the speed of light?

Obviously that can’t be so, but I can’t figure out why.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
rede96 said:
However, as the light pulse is traveling in the cable, and the cable is now traveling at 0.75c wrt to ship A and ship B, does that mean that the light pulse is closing the gap at a rate of 1.75c wrt to ship B and thus wouldn’t the light pulse arrive at ship B before the light beam?
No. You must add the velocities relativistically. If the speed of the light with respect to the cable is c, then its speed with respect to ship B is also c. (In a real cable, the light pulse will travel less than c, which makes things a bit more interesting.)
 
  • #3
Doc Al said:
No. You must add the velocities relativistically. If the speed of the light with respect to the cable is c, then its speed with respect to ship B is also c.

Ok, so using this formula I take it... w = (u+v)/(1+uv/c2)

I thought because the light pulse was dependant on the cable that I couldn't do this.

So would I still need to add velocities relativistically if instead of a fibre optic cable, I had a really ridged wire and I sent a vibration through it that traveled at c (or as close to c as the physics will allow?)

As the vibration is dependant on the wire and the wire is moving towards ship B, logic would say that the vibration has to get there quicker than if the cable was at rest wrt ship B.

Doc Al said:
(In a real cable, the light pulse will travel less than c, which makes things a bit more interesting.)

Not thought about it much, but how so?
 
  • #4
rede96 said:
Ok, so using this formula I take it... w = (u+v)/(1+uv/c2)

I thought because the light pulse was dependant on the cable that I couldn't do this.
That's the correct formula to find the speed of the pulse.

So would I still need to add velocities relativistically if instead of a fibre optic cable, I had a really ridged wire and I sent a vibration through it that traveled at c (or as close to c as the physics will allow?)
Yes, you'd add the velocities relativistically. Realistically, a vibration would travel down the wire at the speed of sound--much less than the speed of light.

As the vibration is dependant on the wire and the wire is moving towards ship B, logic would say that the vibration has to get there quicker than if the cable was at rest wrt ship B.
Your reasoning is correct. To find out how much faster, add the two speeds using the above formula.

Not thought about it much, but how so?
My only point was that if one of the speeds you're adding is c, the resultant speed is also c. So you don't gain anything. Of course, realistically the speed through the fiber optic cable or the wire will be less than c, so the resultant speed will be greater when you add in the effect of the cable's motion. Slightly more interesting.
 
  • #5
Doc Al said:
My only point was that if one of the speeds you're adding is c, the resultant speed is also c. So you don't gain anything. Of course, realistically the speed through the fiber optic cable or the wire will be less than c, so the resultant speed will be greater when you add in the effect of the cable's motion. Slightly more interesting.


Ok, thanks for that.
 
  • #7
DaleSpam said:
The seminal experiment that confirms what Doc Al is saying is called the Fizeau experiment, and is considered one of the earliest experiments supporting relativity:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fizeau_experiment

Thanks for the link.

I'm not sure I understand it fully. Does the experiment show, through the interference pattern, that the light has moved at different speeds in the different directions?
 
  • #9
DaleSpam said:
Yes, exactly.

Apologies for the stupid question, but how do I know from the experiment that the reason for the difference in speeds wasn't due to light traveling faster than c in one direction and slower than c in the other?
 

Related to Another relativity check please.

1. What is the purpose of "Another relativity check please."?

The phrase "Another relativity check please." is often used in scientific experiments to request a repeated measurement or observation in order to confirm the reliability of the results obtained.

2. Why is it important to perform another relativity check?

Performing another relativity check is important because it allows scientists to identify and correct any errors or discrepancies in their data, ensuring the accuracy and validity of their findings.

3. How many times should a relativity check be performed?

Ideally, a relativity check should be performed multiple times in order to increase the confidence in the results. The specific number of repetitions may vary depending on the experiment and the level of precision required.

4. Can a single relativity check be sufficient?

In some cases, a single relativity check may be sufficient to confirm the accuracy of the results. However, it is generally recommended to perform multiple checks in order to minimize the chances of error or bias.

5. What are some potential sources of error in a relativity check?

Sources of error in a relativity check can include human error, equipment malfunctions, environmental factors, and other experimental variables. It is important for scientists to identify and control for these factors in order to obtain reliable results.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
17
Views
505
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
752
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
98
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
32
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
2K
Back
Top