Relativity Puzzle

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Apr 19 2003 - 16:48:54 MDT

  • Next message: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky: "STORY: "Non-Player Character""

    I have come up with a new paradox in Special Relativity.

    I was explaining a typical thought experiment to an
    acquaintance in order to convey why mass increase
    occurs. You have two bowlers
    on the different spaceships who have their bowling
    alleys aligned and perpendicular to their relative
    motion. If you believe in time dilation (for which
    there is a very standard TE), then it happens that
    when one bowler "measures" the mass of the other
    bowlers ball (as it collides with his), he must conclude
    that that slow moving ball on the other ship is pretty
    massive.

    Anyway, it occurred to me that this TE was all about
    *inertial* mass, and that I didn't have a TE that was
    about gravitational mass. So here it is. Fortunately,
    it can be explained without any math, but I do include
    some math at the bottom of this email. The trouble is
    that its conclusion is apparently opposite to the
    predictions of SR!

    Okay, so you are approaching a solar system at speed v
    in your rocket ship, and you see a planet orbiting a
    star. You are traveling perpendicularly to the plane
    of the orbit of the planet. So imagine that the planet
    is orbiting the star like the tip of a minute hand is
    orbiting the center of a clock on the wall, and you are
    walking towards the clock straight on.

    Now because physical processes happen in that solar
    system in your frame of reference more slowly than they
    do in the that solar system's frame, you observe that
    the planet is moving around its star not very fast. In
    fact, judging from the usual mass of that kind of star,
    its amazing how slowly that planet is revolving about it.

    So using some typical formulas, you calculate the mass
    of the star, and find it to be rather picayune. But
    hold on! Special relativity predicts that your measurements
    of the star should make it *more* massive, not less. Paradox!

    Anyone see a resolution to this?

    (Since Einstein had troubles incorporating gravity into special
    relativity, I'm hopeful that this is a very meaty paradox
    indeed, and shows the need for GR!)

    Lee

    P.S. In order to calculate the mass of the star, note that
    the acceleration of the planet can be obtained from Newton's
    gravitational formula and also from the formula for centrifugal
    force. When we set these equal, we obtain v^2/r = GM/r^2,
    or r = GM/v^2. The paradox then consists of reckoning that
    since the radius of the orbit is unaffected by your motion
    (it's orthogonal to it, after all), it's a constant: so
    the mass of the star is proportional to the square of the
    velocity of the planet around it. Since the velocity in
    your frame is so puny, the mass is puny, but it should be
    magnified, not reduced, according to SR! (Sorry about the
    variable v: here it means the orbital speed of the planet,
    not your relative velocity to the whole system as usual,
    which should be referred to by another variable, say nu.)



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 19 2003 - 16:58:08 MDT