Concerned on the relativity of lengths

  • Thread starter myoho.renge.kyo
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Relativity
In summary, Einstein discusses the length of a moving rod in relation to a stationary system and how it can be measured through two operations involving stationary clocks and the measuring-rod. The present time is determined by the observer's knowledge of the positions of the two ends of the rod at a specific time. The length of the rod is not implied in the time interval between 2:00 am and 3:00 am, but rather in the distance between the two points at a single time. The length can be calculated using the distance and velocity of the rod. However, there is no need for a specific time (t1) in this calculation.
  • #1
myoho.renge.kyo
37
0
A. Einstein writes the following on The Principle of Relativity, p. 41:

"Let there be given a stationary rigid rod;and let its length be L as measured by a measuring-rod which is also stationary. We now imagine the axis of the rod lying along the axis of x of the stationary system of co-ordinates, and that a uniform motion of parallel translation with velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x is then imparted to the rod. We now inquire as to the length of the moving rod, and imagine its length to be ascertain by the following two operations:-"

my concern is the following operation (b):

"(b) by means of stationary clocks set up in the stationary system and synchronizing in accordance with chapter 1, the observer ascertains at what points of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located at a definite time. The distance between these two points, measured by the measuring-rod already employed, which in this case is at rest, is also a length which may be designated 'the length of the rod.'"

the present period of time is from 2:00 am thru 3:00 am, 9/5/2006, in burbank, california.

let the observer ascertain that the points of the stationary system (corresponding to the two ends of the rod to be measured) are located at 2:00 am and then at 3:00 am.

the present period of time then is the definite time at which the observer ascertains at what points of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located.

shouldn't the "length of the rod" be implied in (2:00 am thru 3:00 am) = ("length of the rod") / v? if not, why? thanks! (2:00 am thru 3:00 am, 9/5/2006)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
myoho.renge.kyo said:
A. Einstein writes the following on The Principle of Relativity, p. 41:

"Let there be given a stationary rigid rod;and let its length be L as measured by a measuring-rod which is also stationary. We now imagine the axis of the rod lying along the axis of x of the stationary system of co-ordinates, and that a uniform motion of parallel translation with velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x is then imparted to the rod. We now inquire as to the length of the moving rod, and imagine its length to be ascertain by the following two operations:-"

my concern is the following operation (b):

"(b) by means of stationary clocks set up in the stationary system and synchronizing in accordance with chapter 1, the observer ascertains at what points of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located at a definite time. The distance between these two points, measured by the measuring-rod already employed, which in this case is at rest, is also a length which may be designated 'the length of the rod.'"

the present period of time is from 2:00 am thru 3:00 am, 9/5/2006, in burbank, california.

let the observer ascertain that the points of the stationary system (corresponding to the two ends of the rod to be measured) are located at 2:00 am and then at 3:00 am.
No, the two ends of the rod are located at two different positions at a single time, not at two different times.

the present period of time then is the definite time at which the observer ascertains at what points of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located.
Yes, and again the "location" is position not time

shouldn't the "length of the rod" be implied in (2:00 am thru 3:00 am) = ("length of the rod") / v? if not, why? thanks! (2:00 am thru 3:00 am, 9/5/2006)
There is a single time, two different positions, not two different times.
 
  • #3
thank you for helping me understand. i really appreciate it.

let's say that at t1 (9:00 am) a uniform motion of parallel translation with velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x is then imparted to the rod, and that at t2 (10:00 am) the observer ascertains that at x1 and at x2 of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located.

does the following then imply the "lenght of the rod?":

(9:00 am thru 10:00 am) = (x2 - x1) / v

or

if t1 = 0, then

t2 = (x2 - x1) / v

thank you again. (9:00 am thru 10:00 am, 9/5/2006, in burbank, california)
 
Last edited:
  • #4
The "length" is x2-x1. No need for t1.
 
  • #5
thanks!

but i am confused. at some point in time (let's call it t1) a uniform motion of parallel translation with velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x is imparted to the rod. and at a later point in time (let's call it t2) the observer ascertains that at x1 and at x2 of the stationary system the two ends of the rod to be measured are located.

why is it that there is no need for t1?

if t1 = 0, and the "length" is x2 - x1, does that mean that t2 = (t2 - t1) = (x2 - x1) / v?

thanks again! (9/10/2006, 8:00 am thru 9:00 am in Burbank, California)
 
Last edited:

FAQ: Concerned on the relativity of lengths

How does the theory of relativity impact our understanding of length?

The theory of relativity, specifically Einstein's theory of special relativity, states that the measurements of length and time are relative to the observer's frame of reference. This means that the length of an object or distance between two points can appear different to different observers depending on their relative motion. This challenges our traditional understanding of length as an absolute and fixed measurement.

What is the difference between proper length and observed length in relativity?

The proper length is the length of an object or distance between two points as measured by an observer who is stationary relative to the object or points. On the other hand, the observed length is the length as measured by an observer who is in motion relative to the object or points. Due to the effects of time dilation and length contraction, the observed length can appear shorter than the proper length.

How does the speed of light play a role in the relativity of lengths?

According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, the speed of light is the same for all observers, regardless of their relative motion. This means that as an object moves faster, time slows down and length appears to contract for that object. This phenomenon is known as length contraction and is a key aspect of the relativity of lengths.

Can the relativity of lengths be observed in everyday life?

While the effects of relativity are usually only noticeable at extremely high speeds or in extreme gravitational fields, there are some practical applications of the relativity of lengths in everyday life. For example, GPS systems must account for the time dilation and length contraction of satellites in orbit in order to accurately calculate locations on Earth.

How has the concept of length changed since the discovery of relativity?

The discovery of relativity has fundamentally changed our understanding of length. It has shown that length is not a fixed and absolute measurement, but rather a relative one that is affected by an observer's frame of reference. This has led to a deeper understanding of the universe and has paved the way for advancements in technology, such as GPS systems and particle accelerators.

Similar threads

Replies
166
Views
12K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Back
Top