Is Magnetism Affecting Our Clocks in Space?

In summary, a spaceship with two clocks, C1 and C2, is launched from Earth and synchronized at the midpoint P by sending a light flash. When the spaceship is rotated 180 degrees, the flash arrives at C1 before C2, suggesting a velocity relative to space. However, this experiment is based on the Mansouri-Sexl test theory and assumes anisotropic light speed, which is not supported by special relativity. Therefore, the experiment will not detect any desynchronization and no velocity relative to space can be determined. Additionally, the presence of magnetism and electric fields at the clock locations can also affect the synchronization.
  • #1
yogi
1,525
10
A long spaceship with a clock C1 at the front and a clock C2 at the rear is moving at a uniform velocity wrt to Earth after being launched from the earth. Its motion wrt to Earth is tangent to a radial vector perpendicular to the Earth's surface. We now synchronize C! and C2 by finding the midpoint P of the spaceship and from P we emit a light flash. When the flash reaches C1 we set it to zero and when it reaches C2 we set it to zero - since the distance from P to C1 is the same as the distance from P to C2, the two clocks are now synchronized in the moving frame of the spaceship.

We next rotate the spaceship 180 degrees so that C1 is at the rear and C2 is at the front - we can do this ether by rotating the entire vehicle, or by exchanging them along a linear line, or by initally having placed them on a turntable - we again send a flash from the midpoint P and discover that it arrives at C1 before C2.

By measuring the amount of de-synchronization, we calculate the velocity of the spaceship wrt to space!:

Somethings obviously wrong - but what
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
yogi said:
We next rotate the spaceship 180 degrees so that C1 is at the rear and C2 is at the front - we can do this ether by rotating the entire vehicle, or by exchanging them along a linear line, or by initally having placed them on a turntable - we again send a flash from the midpoint P and discover that it arrives at C1 before C2.
Why?

Garth
 
  • #3
yogi said:
A long spaceship with a clock C1 at the front and a clock C2 at the rear is moving at a uniform velocity wrt to Earth after being launched from the earth. Its motion wrt to Earth is tangent to a radial vector perpendicular to the Earth's surface. We now synchronize C! and C2 by finding the midpoint P of the spaceship and from P we emit a light flash. When the flash reaches C1 we set it to zero and when it reaches C2 we set it to zero - since the distance from P to C1 is the same as the distance from P to C2, the two clocks are now synchronized in the moving frame of the spaceship.

We next rotate the spaceship 180 degrees so that C1 is at the rear and C2 is at the front - we can do this ether by rotating the entire vehicle, or by exchanging them along a linear line, or by initally having placed them on a turntable - we again send a flash from the midpoint P and discover that it arrives at C1 before C2.

By measuring the amount of de-synchronization, we calculate the velocity of the spaceship wrt to space!:

Somethings obviously wrong - but what

Am I missing something here? Since the two clocks are equidistant from P in the spaceships frame of reference and the light flash is sent from P, again in the spaceships frame of reference, why should the flash of light arrive at one before the other?
 
  • #4
yogi said:
By measuring the amount of de-synchronization, we calculate the velocity of the spaceship wrt to space!:

Somethings obviously wrong - but what
I think what is wrong is your assumption that you will find the clocks de-synchronized after the rotation. You stated it as if light moves in an aether with speed dependant upon direction relative to the ship.
 
  • #5
Well actually light does move at a constant speed wrt to space - and it is measured as isotropic relative to any inertial frame - but the fallacy, as noted - is nothing changes when the clocks are reversed.
 
  • #6
Considering Michelson-Morley are we?
 
  • #7
yogi said:
We next rotate the spaceship 180 degrees so that C1 is at the rear and C2 is at the front - we can do this ether by rotating the entire vehicle, or by exchanging them along a linear line, or by initally having placed them on a turntable - we again send a flash from the midpoint P and discover that it arrives at C1 before C2.

Actually this is a basis of a class of experiments that attempt to measure light speed anisotropy. But the theoretical underpinning is NOT SR but rather the Mansouri-Sexl test theory. In that theory, light speed is assumed to be anisotropic and iit predicts a change in synchronization.

By measuring the amount of de-synchronization, we calculate the velocity of the spaceship wrt to space!:

Somethings obviously wrong - but what

Correct, you have rederived one such experiment. What happens in reality is that no desynchronization gets detected (as expected) , therefore there is no way of detecting the speed of the ship wrt space (actually the MS theory uses a preferential frame wrt which light speed IS isotropic). Generally CMBR is chosen as such frame. Either way, SR predicts no desynchro, the experiment (if run) will detect no desynchro, so everything is cool.
 
  • #8
This experiment depends on the magnetism present at the two locations. In one location an alternating electric field, example at the bridge, could cause the hands on the clock to move slightly slower or faster than the hands on the clock of the other and vice versa. This is related to the net torque of the electric field. Say the electric field is acting with a net force of something like 1x10^-30J. This force will roughly cause an acceleration of an electron to be 9.7181729*10^-12m/s^2. A negligible force. For nuclear clocks however this is enough to cause a difference.
 

FAQ: Is Magnetism Affecting Our Clocks in Space?

What is the "Detecting Motion Paradox"?

The "Detecting Motion Paradox" refers to the philosophical problem that arises when attempting to measure the speed of an object in motion. It questions whether it is possible to accurately determine the speed of an object at any given moment.

What causes the "Detecting Motion Paradox"?

The "Detecting Motion Paradox" is caused by the concept of instantaneous velocity, which is the speed of an object at a specific point in time. However, since time is continuously moving and cannot be divided into infinitely small moments, it is impossible to accurately measure the instantaneous velocity of an object.

How has the "Detecting Motion Paradox" been studied?

The "Detecting Motion Paradox" has been studied through various thought experiments and mathematical theories, such as Zeno's Paradox and the concept of limits in calculus. It has also been a topic of discussion in the fields of physics and philosophy.

Can the "Detecting Motion Paradox" be solved?

There is no definitive solution to the "Detecting Motion Paradox", as it is a philosophical problem that challenges our understanding of time and motion. However, advancements in mathematics and physics have provided some insights and potential solutions to this paradox.

How does the "Detecting Motion Paradox" impact our understanding of motion and time?

The "Detecting Motion Paradox" challenges our traditional understanding of motion and time as continuous and measurable concepts. It raises questions about the nature of time and whether it is truly continuous or can be broken down into smaller units. It also highlights the limitations of our current mathematical and scientific understanding of motion and velocity.

Similar threads

Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
37
Views
3K
Replies
36
Views
4K
Replies
75
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
21
Views
2K
Back
Top