Conventionality of Simultaneity and the Tippe Top Paradox in Relativity

In this paper we critically examine a recently posed paradox (tippe top paradox in relativity) and its suggested resolution. A tippe top when spun on a table, tips over after a few rotations and eventually stands spinning on its stem. The ability of the top to demonstrate this charming feat depends on its geometry (all tops are not tippe tops). To a rocket-bound observer the top geometry should change because of the Lorentz contraction. This gives rise to the possibility that for a sufficiently fast observer the geometry of the top may get altered to such an extent that the top may not tip over! This is certainly paradoxical since a mere change of the observer cannot alter the fact that the top tips over on the table. In an effort to resolve the issue the authors of the paradox compare the equations of motion of the particles of the top from the perspective of the inertial frames of the rocket and the table and observe among other things that (1) the relativity of simultaneity plays an essential role in resolving the paradox and (2) the puzzle in some way is connected with one of the corrolaries of special relativity that the notion of rigidity is inconsistent with the theory. We show here that the question of the incompatibility of the notion of rigidity with special relativity has nothing to do with the current paradox and the role of the lack of synchronization of clocks in the context of the paradox is grossly over-emphasized. The conventionality of simultaneity of special relativity and the notion of the standard (Einstein) synchrony in the Galilean world have been used to throw light on some subtle issues concerning the paradox.     

Clocks and the Equivalence Principle

Einsteins equivalence principle has a number of problems, and it is often applied incorrectly. Clocks on the earth do not seem to be affected by the suns gravitational potential. The most commonly accepted reason given is a faulty application of the equivalence principle. While no valid reason is available within either the special or general theories of relativity, ether theories can provide a valid explanation. A clock bias of the correct magnitude and position dependence can convert the Selleri transformation of ether theories into an apparent Lorentz transformation, which gives rise to an apparent equivalence of inertial frames. The results indicate that the special theory is invalid and that only an apparent relativity exists.     

An Analytical Treatment of the Clock Paradox in the Framework of the Special and General Theories of Relativity

No Heading In this paper we treat the so called clock paradox in an analytical way by assuming that a constant and uniform force F of finite magnitude acts continuously on the moving clock along the direction of its motion assumed to be rectilinear (in space). No inertial motion steps are considered. The rest clock is denoted as (1), the to and fro moving clock is (2), the inertial frame in which (1) is at rest in its origin and (2) is seen moving is I and, finally, the accelerated frame in which (2) is at rest in its origin and (1) moves forward and backward is A. We deal with the following questions: (1) What is the effect of the finite force acting on (2) on the proper time interval ⁽²⁾ measured by the two clocks when they reunite? Does a differential aging between the two clocks occur, as it happens when inertial motion and infinite values of the accelerating force is considered? The special theory of relativity is used in order to describe the hyperbolic (in spacetime) motion of (2) in the frame I. (II) Is this effect an absolute one, i.e., does the accelerated observer A comoving with (2) obtain the same results as that obtained by the observer in I, both qualitatively and quantitatively, as it is expected? We use the general theory of relativity in order to answer this question. It turns out that _I = _A for both the clocks, ⁽²⁾ does depend on g = F/m, and = ⁽²⁾/⁽¹⁾ = (1 – ²atanhj)/ < 1. In it ; = V/c and V is the velocity acquired by (2) when the force is inverted.     

MÄRZKE-WHEELER COORDINATES FOR ACCELERATED OBSERVERS IN SPECIAL RELATIVITY

In special relativity, the definition of coordinate systems adapted to generic accelerated observers is a long-standing problem, which has found unequivocal solutions only for the simplest motions. We show that the Märzke-Wheeler construction, an extension of the Einstein synchronization convention, produces accelerated systems of coordinates with desirable properties: (a) they reduce to Lorentz coordinates in a neighborhood of the observers' world-lines; (b) they index continuously and completely the causal envelope of the world-line (that is, the intersection of its causal past and its causal future: for well-behaved world-lines, the entire space-time). In particular, Märzke-Wheeler coordinates provide a smooth and consistent foliation of the causal envelope of any accelerated observer into space-like surfaces.We compare the Märzke-Wheeler procedure with other definitions of accelerated coordinates; we examine it in the special case of stationary motions, and we provide explicit coordinate transformations for uniformly accelerated and uniformly rotating observers. Finally, we employ the notion of Märzke-Wheeler simultaneity to clarify the relativistic paradox of the twins, by pinpointing the local origin of differential aging.     

Twin Paradox and the Logical Foundation of Relativity Theory

We study the foundation of space-time theory in the framework of first-order logic (FOL). Since the foundation of mathematics has been successfully carried through (via set theory) in FOL, it is not entirely impossible to do the same for space-time theory (or relativity). First we recall a simple and streamlined FOL-axiomatization Specrel of special relativity from the literature. Specrel is complete with respect to questions about inertial motion. Then we ask ourselves whether we can prove the usual relativistic properties of accelerated motion (e.g., clocks in acceleration) in Specrel. As it turns out, this is practically equivalent to asking whether Specrel is strong enough to “handle” (or treat) accelerated observers. We show that there is a mathematical principle called induction (IND) coming from real analysis which needs to be added to Specrel in order to handle situations involving relativistic acceleration. We present an extended version AccRel of Specrel which is strong enough to handle accelerated motion, in particular, accelerated observers. Among others, we show that~the Twin Paradox becomes provable in AccRel, but it is not provable without IND.     

Finding the Missing Time in the Instantaneous Turnaround Version of the Twin Paradox

The change in the reading on a distant Earth clock from the point of view of a traveling twin who instantaneously reverses direction is calculated by considering the behavior of the Earth clock during the turnaround, performing an integral, and taking a limit.     

Noninertial Observers in Special Relativity and Clock Synchronization Debates

Selleri's arguments that a consideration of noninertial reference frames in the framework of special relativity identify “absolute simultaneity” as being “Nature's choice of synchronization” are considered. In the case of rectilinearly accelerating rockets, it is argued by considering two rockets which maintain a fixed proper separation rather than a fixed separation relative to the inertial frame in which they start from rest, that what seems the most “natural” choice for a simultaneity convention is problem-dependent and that Einstein's definition is the most “natural” (though still conventional) choice in this case. In addition, the supposed problems special relativity has with treating a rotating disk, namely how a pulse of light traveling around the circumference of the disk can have a local speed of light equal to c everywhere but a global speed not equal to c, and how coordinate transformations to the disk can give the Lorentz transformations in the limit of large disk radius but small angular velocity, are addressed. It is shown that the theory of Fermi frames solves both of these problems. It is also argued that the question of defining simultaneity relative to a uniformly rotating disk does not need to be resolved in order to resolve Ehrenfest's paradox.     

A Lorentz-Poincaré Type Interpretation of the Weak Equivalence Principle

The validity of the Weak Equivalence Principle relative to a local inertial frame is detailed in a scalar-vector gravitation model with Lorentz-Poincaré type interpretation. Given the previously established first Post-Newtonian concordance of dynamics with General Relativity, the principle is to this order compatible with GRT. The gravitationally modified Lorentz transformations, on which the observations in physical coordinates depend, are shown to provide a physical interpretation of parallel transport. A development of ‘geodesic’ deviation in terms of the present model is given as well. PACS subject classifications. 04.20.-q, 04.50.+h     

双子佯谬与星际航行

计算了在两个假想的星际航行方案中,与"双子佯谬"相关的时间差别.这种差别体现了惯性与非惯性参考系经历的时间有绝对差异,而不再是"相对"效应.     

Equivalence Principle and Radiation by a Uniformly Accelerated Charge

We address the old question of whether or not a uniformly accelerated charged particle radiates, and consequently, if weak equivalence principle is violated by electrodynamics. We show that radiation has different meanings; some absolute, some relative. Detecting photons or electromagnetic waves is not absolute, it depends both on the electromagnetic field and on the state of motion of the antenna. An antenna used by a Rindler observer does not detect any radiation from a uniformly accelerated co-moving charged particle. Therefore, a Rindler observer cannot decide whether or not he is in an accelerated lab or in a gravitational field. We also discuss the general case.     

On the Anistropy of the Speed of Light on a Rotating Platform

The paper discusses a recently posed paradox in relativity concerning the speed of light as measured by an observer on board a rotating turn-table. The counter-intuitive problem put forward by F. Selleri concerns the theoretical prediction of an anisotropy in the speed of light in a reference frame comoving with the edge of a rotatiing disc even in the limit of zero acceleration. The paradox not only challenges the internal consistency of the special relativity theory but also undermines the basic tenet of the conventionality of simultaneity thesis of relativity. The present paper resolves the issue in a novel way by recasting the original paradox in the Galilean world and thereby revealing, in a subtle way, the weak points of the reasonings leading to the fallacy. As a background the standard and the non-standard synchronies in the relativistic as well as in the Galilean world are discussed. In passing, this novel approach also clarifies (contrary to often made assertions in the literature) that the so-called desynchronization of clocks cannot be regarded as the root cause of the Sagnac effect. Finally in spite of the flaw in the reasonings leading to the paradox Selleri's observation regarding the superiority of the absolute synchrony over the standard one for a rotation observer has been upheld.     

Equivalence principles exotica

This is a short review of the different principles of equivalence stated and used in the context of the gravitational interaction. We emphasize the need for precision in stating and differentiating these different equivalence principles, especially in the context of prevalent confusion regarding the applicability of the weak equivalence principle in quantum mechanics. We discuss several empirical results pertaining to the validity of the equivalence principle in exotic physical sitautions not directly amenable to experimental tests. We conclude with a section on the physical basis of the universal validity of the equivalence principle, as manifest in the universality of free fall, and discuss its link to cosmic gravity.      

The Clock Paradox in a Static Homogeneous Gravitational Field1

The gedanken experiment of the clock paradox is solved exactly using the general relativistic equations for a static homogeneous gravitational field. We demonstrate that the general and special relativistic clock paradox solutions are identical and in particular that they are identical for finite acceleration. Practical expressions are obtained for proper time and coordinate time by using the destination distance as the key observable parameter. This solution provides a formal demonstration of the identity between the special and general relativistic clock paradox with finite acceleration and where proper time is assumed to be the same in both formalisms. By solving the equations of motion for a freely falling clock in a static homogeneous field elapsed times are calculated for realistic journeys to the stars. ¹ Both authors contributed equally to this paper.     

Distance and the conventionality of simultaneity in special relativity

The conventionality of simultaneity within inertial frames is presented in a general formalism that clarifies the relationship of spatial measures to the choice of simultaneity. A number of claims that such measures undermine the conventional nature of simultaneity are presented and shown to be unfounded. In particular, a recent claim by Coleman and Korte [9] that such measures empirically establish a unique simultaneity relationship is shown to be in error. In addition, the general formalism enables the empirical status of simultaneity within an inertial frame to be clarified by presenting the choice of simultaneity as a gauge choice.1. Recent introductions to the literature have been given by Redhead [35], Ungar [47], Havas [21], and Vetharaniam and Stedman [48].2. The conventionalist position is by no means a uniform one, and in particular, it is worth noting an important distinction exemplified in the respective positions of Reichenbach and Grünbaum. For Reichenbach [37, p. 144f.] we have no empirical access to the one-way speed of light due to the nature of light as a first signal, and the conventionality comes from our absence ofknowledge about the one-way speed of light. For Grünbaum the one-way speed of light is actually objectively undetermined, and the physical attributes that sustain a speed in a given direction are non-existent. See, for example, [16, p. 87] and [17, p. 352]. Discussions of the differences between the positions of Reichenbach and Grünbaum may be found in [14] and [35]. Naturally, one may adhere to a position espoused by Reichenbach without the added ontological commitment of Grünbaum.3. Our is equivalent to (1 - 2), where is the symbol introduced by Reichenbach and customarily used in the discussions of the conventionality of simultaneity.4. An exposition of this argument may be found in the recent text by Lucas and Hodgson [28].5. Schrödinger [42, p. 78] has aptly labeled this quantity the distance of simultaneity.6. Examples of previous uses space-dependent synchrony parameters may be found in studies by Clifton [8], Havas [21], Anderson and Stedman [1], and Stedman [43; 44, § 2].7. This approach has been reviewed by Basri in [4] and [3].8. A number of faulty assessments of the empirical status of the conventionality of simultaneity may be similarly traced at least in part to overly simplistic assumptions on the nature of as Havas [21] and Clifton [8], for example, have had occasion to point out.9. See, for example, [1]. Kinematic formula relating other quantities in a treatment of STR without the standard convention on the one-way speed of light were first derived by Winnie [53].10. In comparison to other space dependent treatments of the synchrony parameter, ourh is analogous to defined by Clifton in Eq. (15) of [8], and equivalent to -f defined by Havas in Eq. (A1) of [21] and to defined in Eq. (6) of our earlier treatment in [1]. We take this opportunity to mention that the irrotational property ofh was inadvertently referred to as solenoidal in this work.11. Equation (26) is equivalent to Møller's expression in § 8.8 of [32] for the speed of light in terms of the metric components where our-h _i is equivalent to Møller's _i (g _i0)/ .12. Note as well, the expression of this operation in standard texts on STR by Rindler [38, pp. 27–28] and Mermin [30, p. 79] respectively: To measure the rod's length in any inertial frame in which it moves longitudinally, its end-point must be observed simultaneously... and, ...a measurement of the length of a moving meter stick involves determining how far apart the two ends areat the same time. In the same context of determining the length of moving rods, Mermin [30, p. 185] proposes that the sense of length entailing the concept of being determined at simultaneous times is inherent in the notion of rods: ...it is precisely the lines of constant time that determine whatA orB means by the stick. For the notion of the stick includes implicitly the assumption that all the points of matter making up the stick exist at the same moment.13. In many ways the claim that the special properties of proper lengths with Einstein synchronization undermines the conventionality of simultaneity is analogous to the claim that the correspondence of the slow-clock transport method of synchronization with that of Einstein synchronization provides an empirical determination of synchronization. The use of clock transport as a means for synchronization was discussed by Reichenbach [37, p. 133f], while the proposal that slow transport of clocks provides a unique form of synchronization was first argued for by Eddington [10]. Arguments that it undermines any significant sense of the conventionality in the one-way speed of light have been given by Ellis and Bowman [13] with responses by Grünbaum [19] and Salmon [41, 40].14. Coleman and Korte [9, pp. 423–425] claim their method is free from any assumptions on the one-way speed of light; however, they assume that is a constant 3-vector.15. Reichenbach explicitly mentioned in [36, § 43] that a condition equivalent to Eq. (13) is a sufficient condition for a constant roundtrip speed of light.16. The remarks of one of the referees have served to alert us to the need to emphasize both of these points.17. The manner in which gravity may be viewed as a gauge theory has been the subject of considerable discussion (see, for example, the discussion in [23] and [24]). We note that the manner in which we are takingh as a potential differs from the sense in which the Christoffel symbols as affine connections may be seen to play a role of gauge potentials in GTR.18. A discussion of the significance of Weyl's work and the importance of the round-trip measurements may be found in works by Yang [56] and Mills [31].19. In the context only of time orthogonal coordinates, an example of the fiber structure we are imposing on space and time may be found in [26, p. 71f]. Again we note that in a more general treatment, where the Christoffel symbols are considered as connections, the fiber structure instead consists of a bundle of linear frames of Riemannian spacetime (see, for example, the presentations in [46] and [23]).20. Our position is not unlike Göckeler and Schücker's [15, p. 75] claim that Einstein's particular choice of coordinates in GTR masks the general gauge structure of the theory.     

On the Conventionality of Simultaneity

Starting from the experimental fact that light propagates over a closed path at speed c (L/c law), we show to what extent the isotropy of the speed of light can be considered a matter of convention. We prove the consistence of anisotropic and inhomogeneous conventions, limiting the allowed possibilities. All conventions lead to the same physical theory even if its formulation can change in form. The mathematics involved is that of gauge theories and the choice of a simultaneity convention is interpreted as a choice of the gauge. Moreover, we prove that a Euclidean space where the L/c law holds, gives rise to a spacetime with Minkowskian causal structure, and we exploit the consequences for the causal approach to the conventionality of simultaneity.     

相对性原理及其对自然界定律的协变性要求--机械能守恒定律协变性疑难的解答

阐明狭义相对性原理的准确含义,批出它并不要求自然界每条定律都单独协变,但要求每条定律至少属于一个协变集合,给出最小协变集的求法。表明机械能守恒定律满足狭义相对性原理及其对自然界定律的协变性要求,还指出一切社会科学定律也都满足狭义相对性原理。     

On attempts to rescue the conventionality thesis of distant simultaneity in str

Recently, some conventionalists have tried to rescue the conventionality of distant simultaneity by introducing a spatially dependent (x,y,z), where {1,2,3}. In this paper, we show that this attempt fails by providing a detailed analysis of the coordinate independent and non-conventional procedure for directly measuring the metricd _M ² on eventspace with respect to a physical radar coordinate system. The measuredd _M ² in turn provides the empirical basis for uniquely determining the hyperplanes of space for a given inertial observer in a way that makes absolutely no reference whatsoever to any kind of synchrony, whether spatially dependent or not except for the sole purpose of assigning physical coordinates to events.     

The principle of equivalence and theories of gravity

We construct classical theories of gravity on the basis of special relativity and the Einstein-Infeld accelerating-elevator thought experiment. The resulting theories share most of the main features of general relativity, namely the nonlinear character of the theory, the metrical significance of the gravitational potentials and the geodesic equation of particle motion. They differ from general relativity in at most nonlinear terms in the gravitational constant G in their equations of particle motion and field equations.     

相对性原理对普遍定律和非普遍定律参考系变换性质的不同要求——关于协变性疑难的进一步讨论

提出普遍定律和非普遍定律以及“协变”与“可导出”的明确定义，证明狭义相对性原理（及其伽利略近似）要求在惯性系变换下，自然界普遍定律是协变的，非普遍定律不协变但是“可导出”的，一切定律都服从相对性原理，从而进一步解答了由爱因斯坦，朗道关于狭义相对性原理的一种错误表述所引起的“协变性疑难”，还将有关结论推广到广义相对性原理情况。     

Tree-Level Violation of the Equivalence Principle

Massive particles of spin 0 and 1 violate the equivalence principle (EP) at the tree level. On the other hand, if these particles are massless, they agree with the EP, which leads us to conjecture that from a semiclassical viewpoint massless particles, no matter what their spin, obey the EP. General relativity predicts a deflection angle of 2.63 for a nonrelativistic spinless massive boson passing close to the Sun, while for a massive vectorial boson of spin 1 the corresponding deflection is 2.62.