Timeline for Seemingly equivalent linear form of the Sagnac effect
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29 at 23:31 | comment | added | KDP | @Hans Also done the calculation in the rotating frame that you requested. | |
| May 29 at 23:30 | history | edited | KDP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1142 characters in body
|
| May 29 at 22:03 | comment | added | KDP | @Hans I have added yet another animation to my answer. I hope you find it useful and enlightening. | |
| May 29 at 20:43 | history | edited | KDP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 13 characters in body
|
| May 29 at 20:37 | history | edited | KDP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 13 characters in body
|
| May 29 at 20:22 | history | edited | KDP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 433 characters in body
|
| May 28 at 5:37 | comment | added | KDP | If you use Einstein synchronisation to measure the time for a signal to go twice around the loop, you would need 4 clocks at each location. Einstein synchronisation is obviously not ideal in the circular setting. | |
| May 28 at 5:32 | comment | added | KDP | If you stay with Einstein synchronisation and the doubled up clocks, the calculations are exactly the same as in the linear case. I could do he calculation for a centralised synchronisation which only requires one set of clocks, but that probably deserves its own question. | |
| May 28 at 5:29 | comment | added | KDP | @Hans If you have clocks at regular intervals all the way around the perimeter, you will need to clocks at every location, using Einstein synchronisation. On set of clocks is used for clockwise measurements and the other set of clocks for making anticlockwise measurements. This is not ideal and artificial. A better synchronisation method would be to use a synchronising signal at the centre. Noe rotating and co-rotating observers would agree on simultaneity, but the rotating clocks would tick slower than the none rotating ones. | |
| May 28 at 5:05 | comment | added | Hans | I get what you are saying. You give a plausible reason why the linear setting could be different from the circular one when a mirror is set at 1/4 and 1/2 position. What about the case when the photon continues on until returns back to the starting point in the circular setting? How would one actually compute $t_1$ and $t_2$ in the comoving frame in the circular setting? | |
| May 27 at 6:04 | history | answered | KDP | CC BY-SA 4.0 |