8

I'm new to this Q&A site, so sorry if my formulas don't look great!

I'm trying to create a function that shows the time on a clock B that's been thrown up from and caught in position A, with respect to the mass of the object it's on (the function would be TB(m)). According to a clock A in position A, clock B has been in the air for 10s, but due to GR, the time shown on clock B should be shorter (how much shorter depends on the mass). Seen as 10s isn't very long, I figured that even if position A is on a mass with a very high curvature, the velocity of the object wouldn't be enough for SR to make much of a difference, so I'm just calculating using GR for the moment (although if SR is important then please let me know!).

So far I've taken the Schwarzschild metric for clock A and B

$$TF=\frac{TA}{\sqrt {1-\frac{2Gm}{rc^2}}}$$

$$TF=\frac{TB} {\sqrt{1-\frac{2Gm}{(r+h)c^2}}}$$

equated them and solved for TB

$$TB(m)=TA\sqrt {\frac {r(c^2(r+h)-2Gm)}{(r+h)(rc^2-2Gm)}}$$

Where r is the radius of the object (which I'm keeping constant), h is the height of clock B, TF is the time elapsed on a clock 'far away', TA is the time elapsed on clock A and TB is the time elapsed on clock B.

However this is only for if the clock were always at one height h, so if I integrate it from 0 to hmax (the height at which clock B starts coming down) with respect to h, and times it by 2 (because the clock has to come down too), then that should equal TB(m).

$$TB(m)= 2\cdot \int_0^{hmax} TB(h)$$

This would work if h increased and decreased constantly, however it doesn't because gravity is acting on the clock.

This is how far I've got with my problem. Would I be right in saying that to account for gravity I need to multiply TB(h) by the inverse of the h-t function of clock B?

Aside from the calculations I've done- am I even going about this the right way? I'm about to start my final year of school, so I'm trying to find a way to work with general relativity that isn't way over my head, and the Schwarzschild formula seems like something much more manageable than most other calculations I'm seeing related to GR. If there's a better way of calculating this though, then I'm more than happy go down another route if it isn't too complex!

Thanks in advance!

Luca
  • 83
  • Hello Luca and welcome to Physics SE. Just a wee bit of note here. StackExchange is not a forum, it's a Q&A site. You may already know that and have just missused the term "forum" but I just wanted to make sure it is clear. Welcome and hope to see more of your contribution in the site! – ZaellixA Aug 08 '22 at 09:45
  • Thanks for letting me know! I've edited my post. – Luca Aug 08 '22 at 10:04
  • Your time dilation equation comes from the line element for proper time of the Schwarzschild metric, for constant angles and $r$. The equation for proper time $\tau$ where both $t$ & $r$ vary is $$d\tau^2=(1-u)dt^2-\frac{dr^2}{c^2(1-u)}$$ where $u=r_s/r$ and $r_s=2GM/c^2$. For Earth, $r_s\approx 8.870056$ mm. – PM 2Ring Aug 08 '22 at 10:44
  • 2
    I don't think you can ignore the "Special Relativity" component. The order of the "gravitational effect" is $\sim 2Gm\Delta h/r^2c^2$. To get the object to $h$ it must be launched at $\sqrt{2Gm\Delta h/r^2}$ and there is time dilation of order $v^2/c^2$. – ProfRob Aug 08 '22 at 10:46
  • Wikipedia has some info & graphs on the combined effect of velocity and gravitational time dilation. – PM 2Ring Aug 08 '22 at 10:53
  • A clock A at rest on a table follows a non-straight line in curved spacetime. It travels 300 000 kilometers in time but the path is curved. In the falling or thrown frame the clock is at rest and traveling 300 000 km. too. Seen from A the thrown up (or freely falling) clock will have traveled in time less. If the clock B is thrown up from the table and falls back on it after ten second you have to integrate over all times along the path it's thrown into. The higher you are the faster the pace of time. But indeed velocity gives time dilation. It's a twin paradox in curved spacetime. – Gerald Aug 08 '22 at 11:04
  • So which effect will win? Time dilation by gravity or by velocty? – Gerald Aug 08 '22 at 11:07
  • @PM2Ring are you saying a similar thing to what ProfRob wrote below? The equation looks slightly different. – Luca Aug 08 '22 at 12:01
  • The full equation can be found on that Wikipedia page or here: https://hepweb.ucsd.edu/ph110b/110b_notes/node75.html We can simplify it for radial motion because $d\theta=d\varphi=0$. – PM 2Ring Aug 08 '22 at 12:15
  • @Luca Rob had some typos, but he's fixed them. BTW, it often makes the calculus simpler to work with $u$ rather than $r$. – PM 2Ring Aug 08 '22 at 12:30
  • @PM2Ring do you mean u instead of $(\frac {rs}{r})$ ? – Luca Aug 09 '22 at 08:18
  • Yes. See here for an example: https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/680961/123208 – PM 2Ring Aug 09 '22 at 08:59

2 Answers2

6

I think it is a bit messier than you would like. You cannot ignore the "Special Relativity part" because the time dilation caused by your launch speed will be of a similar order of magnitude to the gravitational effects you consider in your question.

You need to adopt a more "holistic" approach and start with the proper time interval in the Schwarzschild metric for a radial trajectory. $$c^2 d\tau^2 = \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right) c^2\ dt^2 - \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^{-1}\ dr^2 $$

$\tau$ here is the proper time measured on a clock and $r_s = 2Gm/c^2$. For clock A then $dr=0$ and the expression reduces to the one you have used. Note that, by convention, expressions like $dr^2$ mean $(dr)^2$.

For clock B \begin{eqnarray} c\tau_B & = & \int \sqrt{ \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right) c^2\ dt^2 - \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^{-1}\ dr^2} \\ & = & \int \sqrt{ \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right) c^2\ \left(\frac{dt}{dr}\right)^2 - \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^{-1}}\ \ \, dr \end{eqnarray}

where the integral runs from $r_A$ to $r_A+h$ and then back again.

From there you need an expression for $(dr/dt)^2$ for your ballistic object, which is the same as that for an object released from rest in the Schwarzschild metric at $r_A+h$, where the negative root would correspond to inward motion. $$ \left( \frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 = \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r_A+h}\right)^{-1}\left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^2 \left( \frac{r_s}{r} - \frac{r_s}{r_A+h}\right)\ . $$

Note that if this is supposed to be a problem for something on Earth then you have the added complexity that everything is rotating with the Earth, although that can be neglected to first order at rotation speeds typical of the Earth's surface.

ProfRob
  • 130,455
  • 1
    If we're looking at motion near Earth's surface (or more generally not in a strong gravity regime), it's probably easier to parametrize the curve by $t$ rather than $r$: $$c\tau_B = \int \sqrt{ \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right) c^2\
    • \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^{-1} \left(\frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 c^2}, dr$$One could then approximate the motion as Newtonian, i.e., $r(t) \approx r_E + v_0 t - \frac12 g t^2$ or the like, and get an approximate answer.
    – Michael Seifert Aug 08 '22 at 11:34
  • @ProfRob thanks! I followed until the final expression for (dr/dt)^2. Could you explain where you got that from a bit more? Also, I know it's a stupid question, but when d is in front of something it means the change in that variable, right? And is t the time measured by a clock 'far away'/at infinity? – Luca Aug 08 '22 at 11:52
  • @MichaelSeifert What do you mean exactly by parametrizing the curve by t instead of r? – Luca Aug 08 '22 at 11:56
  • 1
    @Luca: I mean that you can either think of the motion either as $r(t)$ or $t(r)$. If you use $r$ as the parameter, then the range of integration goes from $r_E$ to $r_E+h$ and then back again, so you have to split up the integral into two regions. If you use $t$ as the parameter, then the range on integration goes from $t = 0$ to $t = t_\text{landing}$, and you don't have to split things up. Also, I had a typo in my above expression; it should be $$\int \sqrt{ \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right) c^2\ + \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^{-1} \left(\frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 }, \color{red}{dt}.$$ – Michael Seifert Aug 08 '22 at 12:01
  • Cleaned up a shocking number of typos, thanks. – ProfRob Aug 08 '22 at 12:25
  • 1
    @Luca it's a bit of work to derive that expression and involves establishing that the "map energy" (energy of the object at infinity) is a constant of motion.. There is a nice treatment in "Exploring Black Holes" by Taylor, Wheeler and Bertschinger - free, online. – ProfRob Aug 08 '22 at 12:31
  • @Luca $t$ is just the Schwarzschild time coordinate. Yes, it's essentially the time of a distant observer, but there are some subtleties. See https://physics.stackexchange.com/a/552874/123208 Also, the radial coordinate $r$ isn't quite the distance to the centre, it's defined in terms of the circumference or area. – PM 2Ring Aug 08 '22 at 12:35
  • @Luca $\int dt =$ your TF. As far as doing the integral goes, I think it is symmetric and therefore just twice the integral from $r_A$ to $r_A+h$. – ProfRob Aug 08 '22 at 13:51
  • Ok, thanks everyone, I think I'm starting to get it. One thing I still don't quite understand is what it means when there's a d in front of a variable (eg. dr or dτ). I'm not in an English speaking school system so I might just know it in a different form of notation, but does it just mean the change of that variable (in other words, a different way of writing delta)? If so, then what's the difference between τ and dτ - if τ is say 20s, then wouldn't the change in time between the start and the end also be 20s (0s-20s)? – Luca Aug 09 '22 at 08:15
  • @Luca it is an infinitesimal increment. $\int_{0}^{\Delta \tau} d\tau = \Delta \tau$ – ProfRob Aug 09 '22 at 09:46
  • Ok, thanks, I'll look into that. – Luca Aug 09 '22 at 09:56
1

I'm trying to create a function that shows the time on a clock B that's been thrown up from and caught in position A, with respect to the mass of the object it's on (the function would be TB(m)). According to a clock A in position A, clock B has been in the air for 10s, but due to GR, the time shown on clock B should be shorter (how much shorter depends on the mass) ...

The answer by @ProfRob uses the Schwarzschild metric for the spacetime outside a spherical mass, which is the "right" way to go. But as he showed it did not lead to a closed-form expression for the quantity you want. However, since you are only talking about 10 s we can probably neglect tidal gravity and instead use the Rindler metric, which is not the "right" way to go, but is an approximation to the Schwarzschild metric that should work here. It does result in a closed-form expression.

First, we start with the metric in Rindler coordinates: $$ ds^2 = -c^2 d\tau^2 = -\frac{g^2}{c^2} x^2 \ dt^2 + dx^2 + dy^2 + dz^2 $$ where $g$ is the gravitational acceleration at the starting point $x_0=c^2/g$ and the acceleration is along the $x$ direction. For convenience we can set $y$ and $z$ to some constants and suppress them from now on.

This gives us the Lagrangian $$ \mathcal{L} = -\frac{g^2}{c^2}x^2 \dot t^2 + \dot x^2 $$ which does not contain $t$ so we get a conserved quantity $$ C_t=\frac{2 g^2}{c^2}x^2 \dot t$$ We can determine this conserved quantity by requiring that the proper time for clocks at rest at $x_0$ is equal to the coordinate time, meaning $\dot t=1$ at $x=x_0$. Then we get $C_t=2c^2$. Substituting this in to the expression above and solving for $\dot t$ gives us $$\dot t = \frac{c^4}{g^2 x^2}$$

Now, we calculate the Euler Lagrange equation for $x$ and substitute in the above expression for $\dot t$ to get $$-\frac{2c^6}{g^2 x^3}-2 \ddot x = 0$$

This differential equation can be solved, with initial conditions of $x(0)=x_0$ and $\dot x(0)=v_0$ to get $$x(\tau)=-\frac{\sqrt{(c^2-cg\tau+gv_0\tau)(c^2+g \ (c+v_0)\tau))}}{g}$$ This is the $x$ location of a clock thrown upwards from $x_0$ at a speed of $v_0$ as a function of the proper time $\tau$ displayed on that clock. So, we can set $x(\tau)=x_0$ and solve for $\tau$ to find the final time on the thrown clock when it is caught back at $x_0$ when we do that we get $$\tau_f = \frac{2 c^2 v_0}{g\ (c^2-v_0^2)}$$

Now, we need to find the time on the clock that does not get thrown. Since that clock remains always at rest at $x_0$ the proper time for that clock is equal to the coordinate time (recall that is how we set $C_t$). So we simply need to find the coordinate time for when the thrown clock returns in order to find the proper time for the clock that stayed. We can do this simply by integrating the expression above that we already found for $\dot t$. This gives us $$t(\tau)=\frac{c}{g} \tanh^{-1}\left( \frac{v_0}{c} \right) + \frac{c}{g} \tanh^{-1}\left( \frac{-c^2 v_0+c^2 g \tau - g v_0^2 \tau}{c^3} \right) $$ $$t(\tau_f)=\frac{2c}{g}\tanh^{-1}\left( \frac{v_0}{c} \right) $$

Finally, our difference between the two clocks is simply the difference $$\Delta \tau = \tau_f - t(\tau_f)$$ If we assume, $v_0=50 \mathrm{\ m/s}$, $g=10 \mathrm{\ m/s^2}$ and $c=299792458 \mathrm{\ m/s}$ then we get that $\Delta \tau = 1.85 \ 10^{-13}\mathrm{\ s}$

Dale
  • 99,825
  • thanks! I thought the answer by @ProfRob lead to a closed-form expression though. If I substitute this $ \left( \frac{dr}{dt}\right)^2 = \left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r_A+h}\right)^{-1}\left(1 - \frac{r_s}{r}\right)^2 \left( \frac{r_s}{r} - \frac{r_s}{r_A+h}\right)\ $ into the equation for $ c\tau_B $, then after dividing by c, assuming I know the mass, and the range in which the integral runs, I assumed I'd get a numerical answer for $ \tau_B $ – Luca Aug 31 '22 at 14:03
  • Well, his formula still has derivatives and integrals so it certainly isn't a closed form solution as written. I couldn't figure out how to get a closed form solution from it, but perhaps there is some way I didn't see. – Dale Aug 31 '22 at 16:36
  • Yeah, I see what you mean about it not being closed form now, I tried my idea out and it doesn't come out with a single value. Apropos your answer, I wanted to be able to use the calculations on bigger masses as well, so an approximation to flat spacetime like the Rindler metric wouldn't really work. As I said in my question, I'm still only in my last year of school though, so is there anything not necessarily so complex that I could work with to give me an approximate answer (even if it isn't strictly speaking correct)? Something maybe of the same ilk as the simplified Schwarzschild metric? – Luca Sep 04 '22 at 10:10