Inconsistency in Length contraction

In summary, there is an inconsistency in the time measurements of ca2 due to the relativity of simultaneity. The two clocks, ca1 and ca2, are only synchronous in A's frame, but not in B's frame. This can be explained by the different perspectives and frames of reference of the two astronauts. It is recommended to use the full Lorentz transform instead of the length contraction and time dilation formulas in order to accurately solve these types of time measurement problems.
  • #1
KallaNikhil
Let there be 2 astronauts A and B in uniform relative motion and they are moving towards each other. Let A be moving in a spaceship of length L and there are 2 clocks ca1 and ca2 attached to the front and back of the spaceship respectively and let clock of B be cb. The moment when the front of the A's spaceship crosses B then B sets it's time cb equal to ca1. Now from A's perspective when the back of the spaceship crosses B , ca2 must have elapsed more time than cb. But from B's perspective ca2 must have elapsed less time than cb (after including length contraction of spaceship from B's perspective). How can there be an inconsistency in the time measurements of ca2 ? (time elapsed is the time taken for the spaceship to cross B)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
KallaNikhil said:
But from B's perspective ca2 must have elapsed less time than cb (after including length contraction of spaceship from B's perspective).
First, whenever there is one of these introductory paradoxes, the solution is almost always the relativity of simultaneity. In Bs frame clock cb is offset by an amount that explains this discrepancy.

Second, as a general piece of advice, don't use the length contraction and time dilation formulas. Use instead the full Lorentz transform. It will automatically simplify as appropriate, but it will not simplify in cases where the time dilation or length contraction formulas are inappropriate.
 
  • Like
Likes m4r35n357 and vanhees71
  • #3
KallaNikhil said:
The moment when the front of the A's spaceship crosses B then B sets it's time cb equal to ca1.
As Dale says, your problem is the relativity of simultaneity. The quoted sentence is where you went wrong. "The moment when..." according to which frame? The two astronauts won't agree what that moment is, except at the front of the rocket.
 
  • #4
Dale said:
First, whenever there is one of these introductory paradoxes, the solution is almost always the relativity of simultaneity. In Bs frame clock cb is offset by an amount that explains this discrepancy.

Second, as a general piece of advice, don't use the length contraction and time dilation formulas. Use instead the full Lorentz transform. It will automatically simplify as appropriate, but it will not simplify in cases where the time dilation or length contraction formulas are inappropriate.
I think you mean clock ca2 is offset compared to ca1 in B's frame.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #5
PAllen said:
I think you mean clock ca2 is offset compared to ca1 in B's frame.
oops, yes. Thank you
 
  • #6
KallaNikhil said:
The moment when the front of the A's spaceship crosses B then B sets it's time cb equal to ca1.
Exercise: what time does ca2 show according to astronaut B when the above takes place?
 
  • #7
Ibix said:
As Dale says, your problem is the relativity of simultaneity. The quoted sentence is where you went wrong. "The moment when..." according to which frame? The two astronauts won't agree what that moment is, except at the front of the rocket.
I am talking about the time when the back of the spaceship just crosses B. Shouldn't they both agree on the time shown by the clock ca2 ? (I am not talking about the time shown by their respective clocks but the time shown by ca2 only from the 2 frames, Assume that a physical clock is present)
 
  • #8
KallaNikhil said:
I am talking about the time when the back of the spaceship just crosses B. Shouldn't they both agree on the time shown by the clock ca2 ? (I am not talking about the time shown by their respective clocks but the time shown by ca2 only from the 2 frames, Assume that a physical clock is present)
No. A and B don't agree what "at the same time as ca1 and cb passed each other" means except at the location where ca1 and cb passed each other. So they don't agree what ca2 read "at that same time". They'll agree what ca2 reads when it passes cb.
 
  • #9
PAllen said:
I think you mean clock ca2 is offset compared to ca1 in B's frame.
No, I meant regarding the different values of ca2 as observed from the 2 different frames at the instant when the back of the spaceship just crosses B.
 
  • #10
Ibix said:
No. A and B don't agree what "at the same time as ca1 and cb passed each other" means except at the location where ca1 and cb passed each other. So they don't agree what ca2 read "at that same time". They'll agree what ca2 reads when it passes cb.
is it not that ca1 and ca2 are synchronous ?
 
  • #11
KallaNikhil said:
is it not that ca1 and ca2 are synchronous ?
They are syntonous according to all inertial frames (i.e. they tick at the same rate as each other, no matter what frame they are measured from)
They are synchronous according only according to A's frame (in that frame they show the same reading at the same time. In other frames they do not).
 
  • #12
KallaNikhil said:
is it not that ca1 and ca2 are synchronous ?
As jbriggs444 says, only in one frame. That's what "relativity of simultaneity" means - whether two events are regarded as simultaneous is a frame-dependent thing.
 
  • #13
KallaNikhil said:
No, I meant regarding the different values of ca2 as observed from the 2 different frames at the instant when the back of the spaceship just crosses B.
I was replying to Dale. He knows what I meant, and he was describing the same thing, just typed too quickly.
 
  • #14
KallaNikhil said:
is it not that ca1 and ca2 are synchronous ?
They are synchronized only in A's frame. In B's frame they are not synchronized.
 
  • #15
PAllen said:
I was replying to Dale. He knows what I meant, and he was describing the same thing, just typed too quickly.
To confirm for the OP, yes @PAllen and I agree, I just made a small typo which he caught and corrected.
 

Related to Inconsistency in Length contraction

1. What is length contraction?

Length contraction, also known as Lorentz contraction, is a phenomenon in special relativity where an object appears shorter in the direction of its motion when observed from a different frame of reference.

2. Why does length contraction occur?

Length contraction occurs due to the principle of relativity, which states that the laws of physics should appear the same to all observers in uniform motion. In order to maintain this principle, space and time must be perceived differently by observers in different frames of reference.

3. How does length contraction affect the speed of light?

Length contraction does not affect the speed of light. According to the theory of relativity, the speed of light is constant for all observers, regardless of their frame of reference. Therefore, even though the length of an object may appear shorter to an observer in a different frame of reference, the speed of light remains the same.

4. Can length contraction be observed in everyday life?

Yes, length contraction can be observed in everyday life, but only at extremely high speeds close to the speed of light. For example, particles in a particle accelerator appear to be shorter when observed from a different frame of reference due to their high velocities.

5. How does length contraction affect the measurement of time?

Length contraction does not directly affect the measurement of time. However, it is closely related to time dilation, which is the phenomenon where time appears to pass slower for objects in motion compared to those at rest. This is another consequence of the principle of relativity and is a key concept in the theory of special relativity.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
45
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
981
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
63
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
991
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
14
Views
900
Back
Top