It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
That is the Ian McCausland's summary of the question, but he also quotes the question in Dingle's own words:
Dingle’s Question
The question that Dingle asked was the central theme of his book
Science at the Crossroads [2], and he claimed that, unless that
question could be answered, the special theory failed. This question
might be worded very briefly as follows: Which of two clocks in
uniform relative motion does the special theory require to work more
slowly?
So that is the question.
According to the special relativity theory, as
expounded by Einstein in his original paper, two similar,
regularly-running clocks, A and B, in uniform relative
motion, must work at different rates. In mathematical
terms, the intervals, dt and dt’, which they record between
the same two events are related by the Lorentz
transformation, according to which dt ≠ dt’. Hence one
clock must work steadily at a slower rate than the other.
The theory, however, provides no indication of which
clock that is, and the question inevitably arises: How is
the slower-working clock distinguished? The supposition
that the theory merely requires each clock to appear to
work more slowly from the point of view of the other is
ruled out not only by its many applications and by the fact
that the theory would then be useless in practice, but also
by Einstein’s own examples, of which it is sufficient to cite
the one best known and most often claimed to have been
indirectly established by experiment, viz. ‘Thence’ [i.e.
from the theory he had just expounded, which takes no
account of possible effects of acceleration, gravitation, or
any difference at all between the clocks except their state
of uniform motion] ‘we conclude that a balance-clock at
the equator must go more slowly, by a very small amount,
than a precisely similar clock situated at one of the poles
under otherwise identical conditions.’ Applied to this
example, the question is: what entitled Einstein to
conclude from his theory that the equatorial, and not the
polar, clock worked more slowly?
That is truly a special relativity example, because there are no accelerations. If you ask a special relativity question, you can get a special relativity answer.
Vermilion thinks Cerulean's clock runs slow. But of course from Cerulean's perspective it is Vermilion who is moving, and Vermilion whose clock runs slow. How can both think the other's clock runs slow? Paradox!
The resolution of the paradox, as usual in special relativity, involves simultaneity, and as usual it helps to draw a spacetime diagram, such as this one from the Centre of the Lightcone page....
Special relativity doesn't require either of the two clocks to move more slowly, if you just stick to true special relativity examples where there is no acceleration, right?
I suggest that scientists need to answer Dingle’s Question. Since the question was explicitly about the special theory of relativity, I suggest that the answer to the question should have the following properties: it should provide a clear criterion to distinguish which of two clocks in relative motion the special theory requires to work more slowly, the applicability of the criterion to the case of the polar and equatorial clocks should be clear, and the answer should not depend in any way on the general theory of relativity. The world has been waiting more than thirty-five years for Herbert Dingle’s perfectly reasonable question to be answered.
Where did you get the idea Einstein's work didn't apply to other galaxies?
Originally posted by BobAthome
Einstiens work, prtained too this galaxy.
not this universe.
that is the problem,
when you change,
universes
Wrong.
Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
Bit gobbledegooky there op.
Quick and simplified answerin laymans terms is that the clock at equator will run more slowly due to slightly
lower g and higher linear velocity regardless of the frame of ref
You can answer that question from 3 reference frames, which I'll call A, B and C.
Originally posted by kaleshchand
Two spaceships start off from two different planets a few light years apart (going in a straight line to each others planet). They accelerate at the same rate of acceleration until they reach a pre-determined velocity (say 0.2c). When they are at the velocity of 0.2c with respect to their starting planets, they are moving at approx 0.38c relative to each other. So which clock is running slow?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Wrong.
Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
Bit gobbledegooky there op.
Quick and simplified answerin laymans terms is that the clock at equator will run more slowly due to slightly
lower g and higher linear velocity regardless of the frame of ref
Lower g's don't make a clock run slower.
Velocity does make a clock run more slowly. While you got that part right, you're missing the point about the velocity of a clock at the equator. It's not linear. Linear means a straight line. The surface of the Earth is curved. Therefore it's moving in a curved motion, not a straight line motion, which means it's experiencing acceleration.
Originally posted by Angelic Resurrection
Lol linear means the tangential velocity here and besides both the clocks experience equal accel.
Here is what Einstein said about velocity affecting time when he explained special relativity:
Originally posted by kaleshchand
The problem here is that it is said that velocity slows or speeds up time. But it does not. Velocity does not affect time in any way.
Every reference-body (co-ordinate system) has its own particular time; unless we are told the reference-body to which the statement of time refers, there is no meaning in a statement of the time of an event.