- #1
aleemudasir
- 68
- 0
How far is the definition of time that time is change in space, correct?
Last edited:
jedishrfu said:I'm not sure what you're asking.
Is this related to Special Relativity and the fact that different observers may have clock running at different rates?
jedishrfu said:I'm not sure what you're asking.
Is this related to Special Relativity and the fact that different observers may have clock running at different rates?
If we wish to describe the motion of a material point, we give the values of its co-ordinates as functions of the time. Now we must bear carefully in mind that a mathematical description of this kind has no physical meaning unless we are quite clear as to what we understand by “time.” We have to take into account that all our judgments in which time plays a part are always judgments of simultaneous events. If, for instance, I say, “That train arrives here at 7 o'clock,” I mean something like this: “The pointing of the small hand of my watch to 7 and the arrival of the train are simultaneous events.”
George maybe you should write an FAQ or something on it. This question does seem to pop up often even though the operational definition of time is quite clearly spelled out in relativity texts and the likes.ghwellsjr said:Time is what a clock measures.
Wow, I've never heard so many misstatements all in one place in a long time.pervect said:There are at least two types of time - coordinate time, and proper time. And sums and differences thereof, of course.
Coordinate time tells you WHEN something happens - usually the something is abstracted as "an event".
Proper time is a duration, usually described as "wristwatch time". It's measured by some acual clock. The clock can be abstractl specified by some worldline in space-time.
The confusing part starts to happen when one tries to explain that coordinate clocks don't necessarily run at the rate as real clocks, and that this is called time dilation.
MOre confusion tends to arise when one attempts to explain that "at the same time" is an observer dependent statement, often a coordinate-dependent one.
I think a lot of the confusion involves "unlearning" some pre-relativistic ideas about time.
pervect said:There are at least two types of time - coordinate time, and proper time.
A.T. said:Isn't coordinate time just the proper time of some clock, that we can choose arbitrarily? In SR coordinate time is the proper time of a clock at rest in the reference frame that we have chosen. In GR we have to choose the position of the "coordinate clock" as well.
ghwellsjr said:Wow, I've never heard so many misstatements all in one place in a long time.
First off, Coordinate Time is an abstraction just like Coordinate Distance to permit us to define an Inertial Reference Frame (IRF) so that there are not any real coordinate clocks (or rulers) permeating all of space but if we wanted to actually put a real clock at a real coordinate location somewhere, it would keep Proper Time just like any other clock.
In the 1970s, it became clear that the clocks participating in TAI were ticking at different rates due to gravitational time dilation, and the combined TAI scale therefore corresponded to an average of the altitudes of the various clocks. Starting from Julian Date 2443144.5 (1 January 1977 00:00:00), corrections were applied to the output of all participating clocks, so that TAI would correspond to proper time at mean sea level (the geoid). Because the clocks had been on average well above sea level, this meant that TAI slowed down, by about 10^−12. The former uncorrected time scale continues to be published, under the name EAL (Echelle Atomique Libre, meaning Free Atomic Scale).[10]
ghwellsjr said:The only difference between such a clock and some other clock that we might want to consider is that the "Coordinate Clock" must forever remain inertial which means it must remain at its coordinate location. We also set it one time to match the Coordinate Time and never set or reset it again.
It wasn't. My first reaction to the term "coordinate clock" was that it seems like a useless concept. I thought, why would we want a clock that measures coordinate time? But you explained that in your next post.pervect said:I didn't think anything I said was even mildly controversial!
Pervect said that confusion arises as one tries to explain this, so he was clearly talking about how people who are new to relativity find this confusing.ghwellsjr said:And there is nothing confusing about "at the same time" if we simply point out that we mean Coordinate Time according to a chosen IRF.
pervect said:I didn't think anything I said was even mildly controversial!
I would agree that coordinate time is an abstraction.
pervect said:Coordinate time and coordinate time standards are an important part of everyday life. Drawing the simple distinction between "time as a coordinate" and "time as in interval" is a rather elementary, but I think important, step in understanding what we mean when we say "time".
A coordinate system is a function that takes points in spacetime to 4-tuples of real numbers. If p is a point in spacetime (i.e. an event), and ##\phi## is a coordinate system defined on a set that includes p, then we can write ##\phi(p)=(t,x,y,z)##. The time coordinate of p in the coordinate system ##\phi## is just the number t. So coordinate time (i.e. the time coordinate) is a property of an event and a coordinate system. Change the coordinate system, and the time coordinate of p changes.ash64449 said:Fredrik,i am new to relativity.
What is the difference between co-ordinate time and proper time?
Time dilation is about how two inertial coordinate systems in SR that take the same event to 0 assign different time coordinates to events on the time axis of one of the coordinate systems. So time dilation is about coordinate time. Problems involving time dilation can however often be solved by considering proper time instead. This is e.g. the fastest way to find the correct ages of the twins in the twin paradox.ash64449 said:Then which time is used to explain time dilation? Is it proper time?
So time dilation is about coordinate time.
I'm going to answer this in the context of inertial coordinates in Special Relativity (without gravity).ash64449 said:What is the difference between co-ordinate time and proper time?
Naty1 said:Fredrik:
Oh no...just when I thought I had this straight in my mind.
I would have answered: Time dilation is about proper time: Two different observers record different elapsed [proper] times on their own clocks after starting out at some location, travel different paths, then rejoin later.
What's wrong with this??
That's the twin paradox, and as I said, the fastest way to find the correct ages of the twins is to calculate the proper time of their world lines. So there's nothing wrong with what you said.Naty1 said:I would have answered: Time dilation is about proper time: Two different observers record different elapsed [proper] times on their own clocks after starting out at some location, travel different paths, then rejoin later.
Coordinate time allows you to measure events that are far apart in distance.
To "extend" your proper time to make measurements is coordinate time.
The concepts of space and time were separate in physical theory prior to the advent of special relativity theory, which connected the two and showed both to be dependent upon the observer's state of motion. In Einstein's theories, the ideas of absolute time and space were superseded by the notion of spacetime in special relativity, and by dynamically curved spacetime in general relativity.
Naty1 said:I would have answered: Time dilation is about proper time: Two different observers record different elapsed [proper] times on their own clocks after starting out at some location, travel different paths, then rejoin later.
DrGreg said:I'm going to answer this in the context of inertial coordinates in Special Relativity (without gravity).
Proper time is measured by a single clock and can be used only for events that occur locally, right next to the clock.
Coordinate time allows you to measure events that are far apart in distance. To do so you can't use a single clock, you need multiple clocks, each located next to the event it is measuring. So imagine a whole network of clocks, all a fixed distance from each other, and all ticking at the same rate. The important issue is that you need to synchronise all these clocks to each other, and that's a non-trivial process. For inertial coordinates, there's an agreed way of doing this ("Einstein synchronisation"). Once you've done all that, the coordinate time at an event is determined by the nearest local clock within the network of clocks.
For time dilation, you compare the proper time on one clock that is moving relative to the network, against the coordinate time on the network of clocks
Hmm. As far as I understand your classification scheme I would have put it as a correspondence rule of GR. Specifically, the correspondence rule for proper time. Am I missing some subtle point you are trying to make?Fredrik said:(A correspondence rule is an assumption about how to interpret the mathematics of the theory as predictions about results of experiments).
The old statement "time is what a clock measures" is not a definition of time in GR, or in any other theory.
I prefer to think of time dilation as the ratio of coordinate time and proper time.Fredrik said:Time dilation is about how two inertial coordinate systems in SR that take the same event to 0 assign different time coordinates to events on the time axis of one of the coordinate systems. So time dilation is about coordinate time.
So in SR relative speed affects comparative elapsed times; in GR different gravity potentials [curvatures of spacetime] also affect relative elapsed times...an additional effect on time and space. Unlike Newtonian physics, there is no universal absolute time.
Since one of the coordinate times is a proper time in the standard time dilation scenario, that's equally correct.DaleSpam said:I prefer to think of time dilation as the ratio of coordinate time and proper time.
Lets suppose we have two networks A and B. All the clocks in network A are inertial and at rest relative to each other. All the clocks in network B are inertial and at rest relative to each other. But each network is moving at a constant velocity relative to the other network.ash64449 said:what if a network of clocks are moving relative to another network of clocks?
If what you say is correct,then won't co-ordinate time of event measured by the one moving relative to observer change as proper time change?
The IP address that you used to post the OP has not been blocked as far as I can tell, but it's close to a range of IP addresses that was blocked in February for spam. It's possible that your ISP assigned you an IP address from the blocked range today. I will discuss this with the other mentors. Please be patient while I do.aleemudasir said:Why has my IP address been blocked? I had to use a proxy to access this forum. I am the one who posted the OP.
The definition of time varies depending on the context and field of study. In general, time is defined as the measurement of the duration between events or the progression of events. It is often described as a continuous and irreversible flow.
This is a debated topic among scientists and philosophers. Some argue that time is a fundamental property of the universe, while others believe it is a human construct used to measure and understand the world around us. The answer may vary depending on the perspective and theories being considered.
Time is measured using various units such as seconds, minutes, hours, days, and years. These units are based on the Earth's rotation and revolution around the sun. However, in physics, time is measured using more precise units such as nanoseconds and picoseconds.
Currently, there is no scientific evidence that time can be manipulated or controlled. However, some theories, such as Einstein's theory of relativity, suggest that time can be affected by factors such as gravity and velocity. Further research and advancements in technology may shed more light on this question.
According to the theory of relativity, time is not constant and can vary depending on the observer's frame of reference. Time can also be affected by factors such as gravity and velocity. However, for practical purposes, we consider time to be constant and use it as a consistent measure of events.