TRM 2 15
TRM 2 15
TRM 2 15
Special Relativity
2.1 The Need for Ether Space time
2.2 The Michelson-Morley Experiment
2.3 Einstein’s Postulates diagrams are
2.4 The Lorentz Transformation
2.5 Time Dilation and Length Contraction skipped
2.6 Muon observation on earth (experimental verification special relativity)
2.7 Twin Paradox (NOT a problem of special relativity)
2.8 Addition of Velocities
2.9 Doppler Effect
Summary up to that point & Conclusions Michelson-Morley experiment
2.10 Relativistic Momentum
2.11 Relativistic Energy
Pair Production and Annihilation
2.13 Computations in Modern Physics
2.14 Electromagnetism and Relativity
It was found that there was no
Chapter 15, General Relativity displacement of the interference
fringes, so that the result of the
experiment was negative and
would, therefore, show that there is
still a difficulty in the theory itself…
- Albert Michelson, 1907
The "paradox" is only a conflict between reality and your feeling of
1
what reality "ought to be." R. P. Feynman
Newtonian (Classical) Relativity /
Invariance due to Galileo Galilei, 1564 - 1642
All of mechanics (i.e. Newton’s laws) is
independent on the inertial reference frame in
which it is happening. Not only do we not feel that
the Earth is moving (around the sun while
spinning), we also cannot prove this by
mechanical experiments.
So the Earth may well be moving around the sun
despite the catholic church’s burning of Giordano
Bruno (1548-1600) on the stake for that belief.
2
Inertial Frames K and K’
For a point P
In system K: P = (x, y, z, t) v = constant, no
acceleration,
In system K’: P = (x’, y’, z’, t’) Newton’s first law
x P
K K’ x’-axis
x-axis
Space and time are separate, both are fundamental frames in which 4
physical processes are happening
Conditions of the Galilean Transformation
Parallel axes
K’ has a constant relative velocity in the x-direction
with respect to K
5
The Inverse Relations
6
The Transition to Modern Relativity
Although Newton’s laws of motion had the same form under the Galilean
transformation, Maxwell’s equations did not !!!
So some corrections should be needed for their validity on Earth, some other
corrections for their validity on Mars, …
7
2.1: The Need for Ether
The wave nature of light “requires” that there
existed a propagation medium called the
luminiferous ether or just ether. (Assuming
that light is just like the other waves known to
classical physics.)
Ether had to have such a low density that the planets
could move through it without loss of energy
8
Maxwell’s Equations
9
An Absolute Reference System
10
2.2: The Michelson-Morley Experiment
11
Typical interferometer fringe pattern
expected when the system is rotated by 90°
12
The Michelson Interferometer
Whole
apparatus is
considered to
move with
respect to the
ether
light source is
originally a
selected range
of rays from the
sun, but can be
any sort of light
as the real aim
is detecting
motion with
respect to ether
rather then sun
13
Near mono-chromaticity of light is required for sharp interference pattern
The Michelson Interferometer
1. AC is parallel to the motion
of the Earth inducing an “ether
wind”
14
15
The Analysis
·
So that the change in time is:
16
17
The Analysis (continued)
18
The Analysis (continued)
1st part of first Homework is the derivation of the classical
analysis for this experiment, justifying all the steps from t1 = …
from slide 16 onwards, show all of your intermediate steps and
end in the result below, also convince yourself and the
teaching assistant that the expressions for t1, t2, t1’ and t2’ are
all correct
and upon a binomial expansion, assuming
v/c << 1, this reduces to
V = 3 × 104 m/s
together with
ℓ1 ≈ ℓ2 = 1.2 m (the longer the better for experiment)
21
Michelson’s and almost all other’s
Conclusions
Michelson should have been able to detect a phase shift of
light interference fringes due to the time difference between
path lengths but found none. (Speed of Earth in orbit 30 km/s would be
sufficiently fast for these kinds of measurements if classical physics were applicable)
22
Possible Explanations
23
The FitzGerald Contraction
Another hypothesis proposed independently by both G. F. FitzGerald (just
an assumption) and H. A. Lorentz (as part of his transformations)
suggested that the length ℓ1, in the direction of the motion was contracted
by a factor of
24
The Michelson Interferometer
25
l2 can be considered to be “set equal” to l1 by nature of fringe shift measurement,
but there is also an additional (Fitzgerald) contraction – marked by two green
primes - in direction of motion of the apparatus with respect to light source
Time t1 from A to C and back:
‘’ ‘’ ‘’ ‘’
So that
Time t2 from A to D and back: 2 2
l 1 ''=l 2⋅√ 1−v c
· inverse Lorentz = √ 1− v 2 c 2 =γ − 1
factor
‘’
= 0, a stable setting of
the interferometer
26
Upon rotating the apparatus (we use black primes to
mark the rotation), the optical path lengths
‘ ℓ1 and ℓ2‘ are
interchanged producing a different change in time: (note
the change in denominators) 2 2
But now
l 2 '' =l 1⋅√ 1− v c
‘’
= 0, the same stable
setting of the
‘ ‘ interferometer, so no
change on turning
=0–0=0 apparatus by 90
degrees can be
observed and indeed it
is not
27
What if we have two observers, one stationary at the
telescope, one far away looking with another telescope while
moving with a constant speed in a straight line parallel (or
anti-parallel) to the direction of the light that goes into the
apparatus and eventually produce the interference pattern
Will they obtain different results? No, just the spacing of the
fringes will be ever so slightly reduced (or expanded
depending on the direction), but the interference pattern will
not change
there is nothing for the experiment to measure according to
Einstein, because there is no electrodynamics experiment
that could detect if earth was moving with respect to the
sun or ether, it would not matter how fast the apparatus is
moving with respect to the source of light (or the sun), length
contraction would just compensate for that, so conceptually
that velocity can also be set zero and we also get an analytical
28
result that agrees with the experimental outcome !!!
The Analysis for v = 0 as it does not have any
effect on the result of physical experiments
·
So that the change in time is:
=0
Regardless of the actual lengths l1 and l2, we won’t see a change in the
29
interference pattern on turning the apparatus by 90 degrees
V=0
v = 0 means we cannot
tell if the earth is moving
from the results of an
optics Maxwell equation
experiment
30
The Analysis for v = 0 (continued)
=0
2 2
l contracted =l propper length wh en
⋅√ 1− v c
a t rest
For v = 30 km/s, orbital velocity of earth around the sun, the 1.2 m of the Michelson
interferometer arm contracts by 6 10-9 m, approx. size of 60 atom next to each other
Binominal expansion: √ 1−x≈1−12x x << 1 x can stand in for v2/c2 32
“What lead me more or less directly to the special theory of relativity was
the conviction that the electromagnetic force acting on a body in motion in
a magnetic field was due to nothing else but an electric field.”
34
Einstein’s Two Postulates
With the conviction that Maxwell’s equations must be valid
in all inertial frames, Einstein proposed in 1905 the
following postulates:
t = 2d -1
γ=
/c
Basically the
same as A to D
and back on
slide 15
The girl has a “light clock”, all processes in the frame in which she is at rest obey
this clock,
The boy watches her light clock, for him her clock runs slower (as she is moving
past him), because one of its tick-tocks takes longer than an identical tick-tock on
an identical light clock he might use that is stationary to him
The situation is symmetric, the girl can claim that his clock is delayed (and for her it
will really be), if something moves past you, its time slows down (really!)
36
Re-evaluation of Time
Newtonian physics assumed that t = t’
37
The Simultaneity in one inertial frame
Frank at rest is equidistant from events A and B, say at
the middle of an exceedingly fast moving train:
A B
0
38
The Problem of Simultaneity
Mary standing on the trains station sees the train moving
to the right with speed v, and observes events A
before event B
0
A B
Frank and Mary are both right, they just need to use the
Lorentz transformations instead of relying on Galilean
relativity,
39
We thus observe…
Two events that are simultaneous in one reference frame (i.e. K
or K’) are not simultaneous in another reference frame (K’ or K)
moving in a straight line with respect to the first frame.
40
The Lorentz Transformations
The special set of linear transformations that had
been found earlier which:
preserve the constancy of the speed of light (c)
between all inertial observers; as this is a
prediction of Maxwell’s equation, all the rest of
Maxwell’s electrodynamics is also invariant to
these transformations; and sure enough,
also account for the apparent problem of simultaneity
of events as observed from different inertial
frames of reference
41
Lorentz Transformation Equations
42
Lorentz Transformation Equations
Short form:
Gamma always larger than one (for some observer) for anything with
mass that cannot move as fast as an electromagnetic wave, beta
always smaller than one, often very much smaller
Space and time mix in these transformation, very loosely speaking they
43
are kind of the same thing, x4 = i c t
Properties of γ
Recall β = v/c < 1 for all observers (with mass).
44
Maxwell’s equations are invariant with
respect to Lorentz Transformation, take the
same form in moving frames and frames at rest, are
valid on all planets
45
Remarks
46
2.5: Time Dilation and Length Contraction
Consequences of the Lorentz Transformation:
Time Dilation:
Clocks in K’ run slow with respect to stationary clocks in
K.
Length Contraction:
Lengths in K’ (meter sticks in the direction of motion, the
space itself in that direction) are contracted with respect
to the same meter sticks and lengths stationary in K.
47
Time Dilation
To understand time dilation the idea of proper time
must be understood:
49
Time Dilation we don’t see time delay on the clock in the moving
frame, for them all is fine, it is just if the time intervals
are compared between frames, the one in K’ is longer
50
Time Dilation
1) T ’ > T0 or the time measured between two events at
different positions is greater than the time between the
same events at one position: time dilation.
2) The events do not occur at the same space and time
coordinates in the two inertial frames
To transform time and space coordinates between inertial
frames, one needs to use the Lorentz transformations
(instead of the Galilean transformations)
There is no physical difference between K and K’, proper time
is not delayed, we just assigned proper time to Frank, we
could as well have analyzed the problem from the frame
of the two girls, then they would have the proper time
51
According to Mary and Melinda…
Mary and Melinda measure the two times for the
sparkler to be lit and to go out in system K’ as times
t’1 and t’2 so that by the Lorentz transformation:
For the ladies, Frank’s unit length is contracted, for him the unit length of the
54
ladies is contracted, why because the experiments/theory says so …
Frank in his rest frame measures the “moving meter stick’s length” in
Mary’s frame (that moves with respect to him).
Vice versa, Mary measures the same in Frank’s frame (that moves with
respect to her)
Thus using the Lorentz transformations Frank measures the length of the
stick in K’ as:
2 Situation is again
Δx'⋅√ 1− vc =Δx=x 2 − x 1 symmetric just as time
dilation was
Frank’s viewpoint is: Mary is in the moving frame, but she can claim just the
55
same, that Frank is in a moving frame and will be equally right!
Both a moving and a stationary observer are corrected, they just
have to relate their observations to each other by taking the
Lorentz transformations into account
56
2.6. Experimental verification special
relativity, why are there so many muons detected on earth?
γ ≈ 15, pretty
significant
The Problem
Upon Mary’s return, Frank reasons that her clocks measuring her age
must run slow. As such, she will return younger. However, Mary claims
that it is Frank who is moving and consequently his clocks must run
slow.
The Paradox
Who is younger upon Mary’s return?
The "paradox" is only a conflict between reality and your feeling of
59
what reality "ought to be." R. P. Feynman
The Resolution
Frank’s clock is in an inertial system during the entire trip;
however, Mary’s clock is not. So this paradox has
nothing to do with special relativity
When all effects are taken care off (in general relativity)
Mary is indeed somewhat younger (less aged) than
Frank
60
Just not a practical proposition, unfortunately
he doesn’t state here clearly that this is not a
special relativity problem, so many people
have misunderstood him.
61
Summary Michelson-Morley experiment
1. If the apparatus is not moving with respect to “special” inertial reference
frames (ether or sun), there is no shift of the interference pattern, v = 0
2. If the apparatus is moving with respect to the “special” inertial reference frames
(ether or sun) at any velocity, there is no shift of the interference pattern, just
length contraction and time delay (consequences of Lorentz transformations)
for any v ǂ 0
3. If we move with respect of the apparatus with ux (watching the interference pattern
from afar with a telescope), there is also no shift in the interference pattern (just
length contraction of the fringes since we can claim that the apparatus moves with
respect to us) regardless if v = 0 or v ǂ 0 in that “special” inertial frame, (but we
would need to apply special relativity velocity additions derived from Lorentz
transformations in the latter case)
P Ux’
x
K K’ x’-axis
x-axis
Assume: space and time are separate, both are fundamental frames in 63
which physical processes are happening
2.8.1: Addition of Velocities using Galilean
transformations
67
H. L. Fitzeau’s famous 1851 experiment
69
Doppler Effect for light is different
red shift
70
Source and Receiver Approaching
71
Source and Receiver Receding
72
Second order (transverse) Doppler
effect for light
74
Since in all inertial frames of reference, all of Maxwell’s
equations will be valid in these frames of reference as well
There is only one world out there and if one needs to consider physics in
different inertial frames of reference, one will have to use the Lorentz
transformations
75
Relativistic Momentum I
Classically Needs to be conserved
for constant Δx Δx
u= p=m⋅u=m⋅ in collisions, but we
have to include special
v in a Δt Δt relativity
straight line
while x is a space distance watched by a stationary (first)
Δx observer (not contracted), t0 (proper time), is the time a
p=m⋅
Δt 0
(second) observer that moves with the particle measures, one
can simplify the two observers to one observing movement in his
or her own frame while being at rest
With respect to the moving (second) observer, the
time of the stationary first observer is delayed Δt=γ⋅Δt 0
Δx Δt Δt Δx Δt
p=m⋅ ⋅ γ= p=m⋅ ⋅ =γm⋅u
Δt Δt 0 Δt 0 Δt Δt 0
What happens when u -> c, p becomes infinite, i.e. v can come very
76
close to c, but will never reach it
Relativistic Momentum II
Loosely speaking “leaving u, the movement in
the frame alone”, we can “blame everything on
the mass” But this kind of Lorentz factor does
not include a velocity between
frames as it did earlier, just the
velocity of something moving with
respect to the stationary observer in
his own frame
So it seams like mass were increasing with velocities greater than zero, for
movement in its own frame of reference the faster something moves, the larger its
momentum already classically, but now there is an extra “Pseudo-Lorentz” factor,
the u is in one and the same frame, we do not need to consider two frames
moving relative to each other for this effect to occur – tested countless times in
particle accelerators !!!
Again this gamma is conceptually different, u is velocity within one frame, v 77
was velocity between frame in former formula for gamma!
Some books have v for velocity,
some u, similarly, K and S, K’
and S’ for the inertial frames of
0
reference
78
79
80
Relativistic Force
Due to the new idea of “relativistic mass”, we
must now redefine the concepts of work and
energy.
Therefore, we modify Newton’s second law to
include our new definition of linear momentum,
and force becomes:
81
Reason why no particle with mass can
move faster than speed of light
82
Reason why no particle with mass can
move faster than speed of light
Vice versa, in order to keep on accelerating a particle constant the force
on a particle needs to increase beyond bounds, would need to be infinite
for u = c
83
Relativistic Energy
84
Relativistic Energy
85
Relativistic Kinetic Energy
(2.58)
86
Relativistic Kinetic Energy
does not seem to resemble the classical result for kinetic energy, K = ½mu2. However, if it is
correct, we expect it to reduce to the classical result for low speeds. Let’s see if it does. For
speeds u << c, we expand in a binomial series as follows:
where we have neglected all terms of power (u/c)4 and greater, because u << c. This gives the
following approximation for the relativistic kinetic energy at low speeds:
which is the expected classical result. We show both the relativistic and classical kinetic
energies in the following Figure. They diverge considerably above a velocity of 0.5 c,
divergence starts at about 10% of c, but for less than 1% of the speed of light one can use the
classical formula.
87
Relativistic and Classical Kinetic Energies
½ (1.4)2 gives
0.98 on the y-
axis
Non-perfect graph,
relativistic kinetic
energy is always
larger than its
classical
counterpart
88
Total Energy
is relativistic kinetic energy plus rest energy
The term mc2 is called the rest energy and is denoted by E0.
This leaves the sum of the kinetic energy and rest energy to be
interpreted as the total energy of the particle. The total energy is
denoted by E and is given by
89
Momentum and Energy
90
Momentum and Energy (continued)
The first term on the right-hand side is just E2, and the second term is
E02. This equation becomes (the accelerator equation)
or
=γm⋅u⋅c
arc sin (v/c)
94
Units of Work and Energy
Recall that the work done in accelerating a
charge through a potential difference is given
by W = qV.
95
The Electron Volt (eV)
96
Other Units
1) Rest energy of a particle:
Example: E0 (proton)
Annihilation of particle and antiparticle, one gets all of the energy back as total
energy of two photons (which is all kinetic as mass is zero (and associated rest energy is
also zero)
99
3.9: Pair Production and Annihilation
Antiparticles, such as the positron, had been predicted to exist in
1929 by P. A. M. Dirac when he had derived his special relativity
compliant version of standard 3D quantum mechanics (according to
Schrödinger and Heisenberg)
In 1932, C. D. Anderson observed a positively charged electron (e+)
in a nuclear laboratory. If sufficiently energetic in the first place, a
photon’s energy can be converted entirely into an electron and a
positron in a process called pair production (“left over energy” will
be kinetic for the created particles and what triggered the pair
production in the first place)
Charge needs to be conserved in pair production as well, i.e. a
photon creates an electron and its positively charged antiparticle.
All four guys mentioned above received Nobel prizes
We now know that to any particle, there is an antiparticle, there can
be anti-atoms (with antiprotons and antineutrons in the core and
positrons orbiting), antimatter, …
Conservation of energy:
Conservation of momentum:
103
Binding Energy, concept, simplified
The binding energy is the difference between the
sum of the rest energy of the individual particles
and the rest energy of the combined bound system.
Example deuteron: the nucleus of deuterium has a
KE changed into mass binding energy of 2.23 MeV, which is considered to be
negative, so the deuteron is not as heavy as the sum of
its constituent proton and neutron, (binding energy of
electron to nucleus is much smaller (13.6 eV in the hydrogen
Definition: ground state)
In case of chemical reactions, binding energy changes are only a couple of eV, but in
case of nuclear reactions up to approx. 200 MeV per split U atom
Hiroshima bomb released energy, 20 kT TNT (Nobel’s high explosive), corresponds
to a total mass loss of approx. 1 gram
106
Conducting Wire Positive test charge moves at
same v ≠ 0 as electrons in wire
magnetic field lines into the paper by
right hand rule, thumb opposite to the
direction of the moving electrons
110
Thompson’s approximate equation for
period of a pendulum (for small
amplitudes neglects all higher orders of
Θ0, but gravitational acceleration (vector)
rad g (magnitude), which varies by as much
as 0.5% at different locations on Earth
L: length of the pendulum
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/Pendulum2secondclock.gif/220px-
Pendulum2secondclock.gif
What is g anyway?
Assumption that earth is a perfect sphere with
GM radially symmetric mass density, so that r can be
F|=m⋅|⃗g|=m⋅ 2
|⃗ taken as radius of that sphere
r
2
G: 6.67 10-11 Nm2/kg2 U 2−U 1=−∫ ⃗F⋅dx With K as an integration
requator : 6.378 103 km 1 constant that we are free
to set to zero if we take r
rpoles : 6.357 103 km as radius of the sphere
M(earth) : 5.979 1024 kg
So gravitational potential energy is negative (zero at infinity) and we can
interpret is as Binding Energy, acceleration due to gravity is equal to the
111
negative gradient of the gravitational potential.
What happens to the force of gravity, the gravitational potential energy and
the gravitational potential some distance away from Earth’s surface?
GM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_potential
Gravitational potential −
x
Earth's surface
- 60 MJ/kg
(-g times radius earth)
Low Earth orbit - 57 MJ/kg
113
Harvard Tower Experiment
In just 22.6 meters, the fractional
gravitational red shift given by
gh
f=υ=f ⋅(1+
0 2
)
c
is just 4.9 x 10-15, but the Mössbauer effect with
the 14.4 keV gamma ray from iron-57 has a
high enough resolution to detect that
difference. In the early 60's physicists Pound,
Rebka, and Snyder at the Jefferson Physical
Laboratory at Harvard measured the shift to
within 1% of the predicted shift.
115
Inertial Mass and Gravitational Mass
Recall from Newton’s 2nd law that an object
accelerates in reaction to a force according to its
inertial mass:
116
1907, when he embarked on deriving general relativity
15.1: Tenets of General Relativity
General relativity is the extension of special relativity. It
includes the effects of accelerating objects and their
masses on spacetime.
As a result, the theory is an explanation of gravity.
It is based on two concepts: (1) the principle of
equivalence of the heavy mass and the dynamic mass, i.e.
there is only one type of mass, and no way of detecting if
one is in non-uniform motion, is “kind of” an extension of
Einstein’s first postulate of special relativity and (2) the
curvature of spacetime due to gravity.
118
Principle of Equivalence
principle of equivalence
shown by experiments in one
nearly inertial reference
frames.
120
Spacetime Curvature of Space
Light bending for the Earth observer seems to violate the premise
that the velocity of light is constant from special relativity. Light
traveling at a constant velocity implies that it travels in a straight
line.
Einstein recognized that we need to expand our definition of a
straight line.
The shortest distance between two points on a flat surface appears
different than the same distance between points on a sphere. The
path on the sphere appears curved. We shall expand our definition
of a straight line to include any minimized distance between two
points.
Thus if the spacetime near the Earth is not flat, then the straight line
path of light near the Earth will appear curved.
121
https://byjus.com/physics/einstein-field-equation/
The Unification of Mass and Spacetime
Einstein mandated that the mass of the Earth creates a
dimple on the “spacetime surface”. In other words, the mass
changes the geometry of the spacetime.
The geometry of the spacetime then tells matter how to move.
Einstein’s famous field equations sum up this relationship as:
123
15.2: Tests of General Relativity
Bending of Light
During a solar eclipse of the sun by the moon,
most of the sun’s light is blocked on Earth,
which afforded the opportunity to view starlight
passing close to the sun in 1919. The starlight
was bent as it passed near the sun which
caused the star to appear displaced.
Einstein’s general theory predicted a deflection
of 1.75 seconds of arc, and the two
measurements found 1.98 ± 0.16 and 1.61 ±
0.40 seconds.
Since the eclipse of 1919, many experiments,
using both starlight and radio waves from
quasars, have confirmed Einstein’s predictions
about the bending of light with increasingly
good accuracy.
124
125
Gravitational Redshift
The second test of general relativity is the predicted frequency
change of light near a massive object.
Imagine a light pulse being emitted from the surface of the Earth to
travel vertically upward. The gravitational attraction of the Earth
cannot slow down light, but it can do work on the light pulse to lower
its energy. This is similar to a rock being thrown straight up. As it
goes up, its gravitational potential energy increases while its kinetic
energy decreases. A similar thing happens to a light pulse.
A light pulse’s energy depends on its frequency f through Planck’s
constant, E = hf. As the light pulse travels up vertically, it loses kinetic
energy and its frequency decreases (which also means its period with
dimension time increases). Its wavelength increases, so the
wavelengths of visible light are shifted toward the red end of the
visible spectrum. (The period (1/frequency) also increases – just as it
did with the pendulum clock)
This phenomenon is called gravitational red shift.
126
Gravitational Time Dilation
A very accurate experiment was done by comparing the
frequency of an atomic clock flown on a Scout D rocket to
an altitude of 10,000 km with the frequency of a similar
clock on the ground. The measurement agreed with
Einstein’s general relativity theory to within 0.02%.
127
Light Retardation
129
15.3: Gravitational Waves
When a charge accelerates, the electric field surrounding the charge
redistributes itself. This change in the electric field produces an
electromagnetic wave, which is easily detected. In much the same
way, an accelerated mass should also produce gravitational waves.
Gravitational waves carry energy and momentum, travel at the speed
of light, and are characterized by frequency and wavelength.
As gravitational waves pass through spacetime, they cause small
ripples. The stretching and shrinking is on the order of 1 part in 1021
even for strong gravitational wave sources.
Due to their small amplitude, gravitational waves are very difficult to
detect. Large astronomical events could create measurable
spacetime waves such as the collapse of a neutron star, a black hole
or the Big Bang.
This effect has been compared to noticing a single grain of sand
added to all the beaches of Long Island, New York.
130
131
Gravitational Wave Experiments
Taylor and Hulse discovered a binary system of two neutron stars that
lose energy due to gravitational waves that agrees with the predictions
of general relativity.
LIGO is a large “Michelson interferometer” device that uses 4 test
masses on two arms of the interferometer. The device detected
changes in length of the arms due to a passing wave in February 2016
132
15.4: Black Holes
While a star is burning, the heat produced by the thermonuclear reactions
pushes out the star’s matter and balances the force of gravity. When the
star’s fuel is depleted, no heat is left to counteract the force of gravity,
which becomes dominant. The star’s mass can collapse into an incredibly
dense ball that could wrap spacetime enough to not allow light to escape.
The point at the center is called a singularity.
A collapsing star greater than 3 solar masses
will distort spacetime in this way to create a
black hole.
Karl Schwarzschild determined the radius of
a black hole known as the event horizon.
133
15.5: gravitational shifts of the wavelength
of light – there sure is no absolute time in the universe
Having moved away from a very heavy object, e.g. sun,
light is red-shifted, i.e. longer wavelengths, shorter
frequency, larger period, means a clock on the basis of
that light runs faster
Two airplanes took off (at different times) from Washington, D.C., where the U.S.
Naval Observatory is located. The airplanes traveled east and west around Earth as it
rotated. Atomic clocks on the airplanes were compared with similar clocks kept at the
observatory to show that the moving clocks in the airplanes ran slower. There is a
certain height above the earth at which both the stationary and moving clock would be
exactly in tune, measure the same time. This is because the time delaying effect of
the movement of the plane (as already present in special relativity) would be
counteracted exactly in the time speeding up effect due to the height above the earth
136
137
Giordano Bruno:
“It is proof of a base and low mind for one
to wish to think with the masses or majority,
merely because the majority is the majority.
Truth does not change because it is, or is
not, believed by a majority of the people.”
138
139
https://youtu.be/CYv5GsXEf1o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYv5GsXEf1o
&feature=youtu.be
More at
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/11/08/breakthro
ugh-junior-prize-mark-zuckerberg-priscilla-chan/7532546
0/
http://www.popsci.com/first-ever-breakthrough-priz
e-junior-winner-made-this-cool-science-video
140
141
Going back to Michelson–Morley experiment, it is clear that it could not
measure any “ether wind” as it was done with light, see next 2 slides
The Analysis for c +- v = c as experiment was
done with light, its consequences are the same as v = 0
Time t1 from A to C and back:
x x x x
Time t2 from A to D and back:
·
x y x
So that the change in time is:
=0
Regardless of the actual lengths l1 and l2, we won’t see a change in the
142
interference pattern on turning the apparatus by 90 degrees
The Analysis for c +- v = c (continued)
=0