| 
	
Science in Theological Perspective Site Map
 
John Byl bio 
  
	On Deriving Special Relativity from Electromagnetic Clocks
	(published in 
	Galilean 
	Electrodynamics 
	Vol.14 (no.5, Sept/Oct 2003): 89-92) 
	John Byl, Ph.D. 
	Abstract 
	Using only classical physics, the basic 
	special relativistic effects are derived by examining the effect of motion 
	on a number of simple electromagnetic clocks. This paper improves upon an 
	earlier derivation by proving, rather than assuming, that clock periods are 
	independent of orientation. 
	  
	Introduction 
	
	It 
	was shown by Byl [1] that the special relativistic effects of length 
	contraction, time dilation, and mass increase can all be derived by 
	examining the effect of motion on a number of electromagnetic clocks. The 
	derivations were based solely on classical physics. In that paper it was 
	assumed that the rates of all electromagnetic clocks varied with speed in 
	the same manner, regardless of their orientation. That assumption might be 
	questioned as to its plausibility. Hence, in this paper, we drop this 
	assumption and show that, by considering one additional clock, the clock 
	rates can in fact be proven to be independent of orientation. 
	  
	Basic Assumptions 
	In this paper we shall again apply only the 
	classical physics of Newtonian mechanics and Maxwell's electromagnetic 
	equations. This involves, in particular, Newton's laws of motion, the 
	Lorentz force law, and Heaviside's equation for the electric field of a 
	moving charge, which Heaviside [2] derived from Maxwell's equations. 
	Implicit in Heaviside's equation is the 
	assumption that there exists a background space, a preferred frame of 
	reference, with respect to which motion can be measured. The electric field 
	of a point charge is spherically symmetric only if the charge is at rest 
	with respect to the background space. Conversely, the asymmetry of the 
	electric field is a measure of the motion of a point charge relative to the 
	background space. 
	As before, we take an electromagnetic ("e-m" for 
	short) clock to be based on the oscillations of a charged particle. No 
	assumptions are made about the precise dependence of clock period, length, 
	and mass on speed or orientation, or even that such dependencies actually 
	exist. However, it is assumed that e-m clocks, if dependent on speed and 
	orientation, all exhibit exactly the same dependencies. This assumption 
	seems plausible, since these clocks are independent of any assumptions 
	regarding their material constituents or scale and since these clocks are 
	all subject to the same physical forces. Assuming that all e-m clocks 
	exhibit similar behaviour, it suffices to consider a few specific cases, 
	from which more general conclusions can then be drawn.  
	
	From an analysis of five clocks, the first four 
	of which are the same as considered in Byl [1], we shall derive all three 
	basic relativistic effects - time dilation, length contraction, and mass 
	increase. This implies, as we shall show, that all observes, whether at rest 
	or in motion, find the same local value for the speed of light, as 
	determined by their own measuring apparatus. 
	  
	Electromagnetic Clocks in Motion 
	The basic equation is Heaviside's equation for 
	the electric field of a moving point charge: 
	     E = qA (1 - β2)
	r /(r3[1- (β sinθ)2]3/2)    
	(1) 
	where β º v/c and A = 1/(4πε0). Here
	r is the vector from the charge to the point of observation, v 
	is the velocity of the charge, and θ is the angle between r and v. 
	This equation was first derived by Heaviside [2] and is well established, 
	although its derivation is somewhat complicated. Since the moving electric 
	field generates a magnetic field B = 
	v´E, the 
	total force acting upon a charge q in the region is given by the Lorentz 
	force: 
	     
	F = q[E 
	+ v´(v´E)/c2]    
	(2) 
	The clock period will depend, as will soon be 
	shown, on the mass of the moving charge and the effective length of the 
	clock. Allowance must thus be made for a possible dependence of both mass 
	and length on the velocity and orientation of the clock. To accommodate a 
	possible dependence of mass on velocity we write Newton's third law in the 
	form 
	     F = d(mv)/dt 
	= v dm/dt + mdv/dt = v(dm/dv)(dv/dt) + mdv/dt    
	(3) 
	Suppose the charge oscillates in the x-direction 
	and that its speed with respect to the clock is much smaller than the speed 
	of the clock (i.e., |dx/dt| « v). If the clock has a velocity v in 
	the x-direction, then 
	     F = (v dm/dv + 
	m) d2x/dt2 º m1 d2x/dt2    (4) 
	where the subscript 1 refers to an orientation 
	parallel to the direction of motion, so that m1 is the effective 
	longitudinal mass. On the other hand, if the clock velocity v is 
	perpendicular to the x-direction we obtain  
	     F » md2x/dt2 
	º m2 d2x/dt2    (5) 
	where the subscript 2 refers to an orientation 
	perpendicular to the direction of motion, so that m2 is the 
	effective transverse mass.  Since equation (5) indicates that m2 
	= m, equation (4) implies that the longitude and transverse masses are 
	related according to the equation 
	     m1 = 
	v dm2/dv +m2    (6) 
	  
	
	(a) Clock #1 
	Consider first a clock consisting of two 
	positive charges q, separated by a fixed distance L0, plus a 
	third positive charge q which is constrained to move along the line joining 
	the other two charges. For example, one could take the outer two charges to 
	be fixed at the ends of a thin hollow cylindrical insulator with the third 
	charge, having a radius slightly less than that of the cylinder, free to 
	slide about inside the cylinder. Then the inner charge has an equilibrium 
	position halfway along the cylinder.  
	The inner charge, upon being displaced a small 
	distance x « L0 from its equilibrium position,  will oscillate 
	about the equilibrium point. The period of oscillation is independent of x 
	and provides the time unit for the clock. 
	Now suppose the clock itself is moving at a 
	speed v in a direction parallel to its axis (i.e., r = xi  and
	v = vi, where i is a unit vector along the x-axis), 
	where v is much greater than the maximum speed of the inner charge relative 
	to the clock. For this configuration the inner charge experiences no 
	magnetic force (i.e., v´E 
	= 0). Hence, applying equations (1) and (2), the electric force on the inner 
	charge is given by: 
	     F = q2A(1 
	- β2)[(L1 + x)-2 - (L1 - x)-2] 
	= m1 d2x/dt2    (7) 
	Since the axis is oriented in the direction of 
	motion and still assuming x « L, this reduces to 
	     F » -q2A(1 
	- β2) 4x L1-3 = m1 d2x/dt2     
	(8) 
	This equation can easily be solved for x, which 
	undergoes sinusoidal oscillation with a period  
	     T1 = 
	2π [m1 L13/4Aq2(1 - β2)]½     
	(9) 
	or, in terms of the rest period T0, 
	     T1/T0 
	= (L1/L0)3/2(m1/m0)½(1 
	- β2)-½    (10) 
	  
	(b) Clock #2 
	A second clock, described by Jefimenko [3], has 
	a ring of radius L0 and positive charge q. A particle of negative 
	charge -q is constrained to move through the perpendicular axis of the ring. 
	The moving negative charge, when displaced a small distance x above the 
	plane of the ring, will oscillate with a period T0 independent of 
	x.  
	This clock, too, is set in motion in a direction 
	parallel to its axis. Since v and E are again parallel, there 
	is no magnetic force on the inner charge. The electric force on the inner 
	charge is given by: 
	
	     F = q2A(1 
	- β2)x(L22 + x2)-3/2[1- 
	β2/(1 + x2/L22)]-3/2    
	(11) 
	Assuming x « L2, this simplifies to 
	     F » -q2AxL2-3(1 
	- β2)-½ = m1 d2x/dt2    
	(12)  
	Again, this yields a sinusoidal oscillation in 
	x, this time with a period 
	     T1/T0 
	=(L2/L0)3/2(m1/m0)½(1 
	- β2)1/4    (13) 
	The only significant difference between these 
	first two clocks is the orientation of the fundamental length L. Equations 
	(10) and (13) indicate that the periods of both clocks can change by the 
	same ratio only if 
	     L1/L2 
	= (1 - β2)½    (14) 
	Thus, while the absolute values of length 
	contraction are not yet known, it is clear that the assumption of equal 
	clock rates leads to a dependence of length contraction on the orientation 
	of the object to its direction of motion.  
	  
	  
	(c) Clock #3 
	Consider next a third clock, similar to clock 
	#1, but this time with its axis oriented perpendicular to its direction of 
	motion (i.e., take r = xi  and v = vj, where 
	i and j are unit vectors along the x and y axes, 
	respectively). In this case the inner charge experiences also a magnetic 
	force. The force equation (2) then becomes: 
	     
	F = -q2 
	A4x L2-3(i + 
	v´(v´i)/c2)(1 
	- β2)-½    (15) 
	         
	or 
	     F = -q2 
	A4x L2-3(1 - β2)½ = m2 
	d2x/dt2    (16) 
	This equation again results in sinusoidal 
	motion, now with period 
	     T2/T0 
	= (L2/L0)3/2(m2/m0)½(1 
	- β2)-1/4    (17) 
	  
	(d) Clock #4 
	A fourth clock consists of a particle of rest 
	mass m0 and negative charge -q in a circular orbit of radius L0 
	about a fixed positive charge q. The central charge is gently accelerated in 
	a direction perpendicular to the plane of the orbit until it is moving with 
	speed v. The Lorentz force on the negative charge, as given by equation (2), 
	will be central. Hence its angular momentum will be conserved. For a  
	circular speed of 2πL/T, this leads to 
	
	2π m0 L20 /T0 
	= 2π m2 L22/T2    
	(18) 
	This in turn gives 
	     T2/T0 
	= (L2/L0)2 m2/m0   
	(19) 
	  
	(e) Clock #5 
	Our fifth and final clock is a modification of 
	clock #3. The end charges are replaced with perfectly elastic, 
	charge-neutral walls, so that the inner particle merely bounces from wall to 
	wall with constant speed u. The clock, oriented perpendicular to the 
	direction of motion, is gently accelerated from rest to the final speed v, 
	where u << v. Strictly speaking, this is a purely kinematic clock since no 
	e-m forces enter into consideration. Since the accelerating force on the 
	clock is perpendicular to the direction of oscillation of the inner 
	particle, the linear momentum mu of the inner particle will be conserved. 
	Taking the oscillation speed as u = 2L/T, this results in the relation 
	     m0 L0/T0 
	= m2 L2 /T2    (20) 
	         
	or 
	     T2/ T0 
	= (m2 /m0)(L2 /L0)    
	(21) 
	  
	Discussion 
	From the above results for the various clock 
	periods we can readily derive the equations for time dilation, length 
	contraction, and mass increase. Comparing equations (19) and (21), we 
	conclude that  
	     L2 = 
	L0    (22) 
	Hence, equation (14) yields 
	     L1 = 
	L0(1 - β2)½    (23) 
	Applying this result and comparing equations 
	(17) and (21), it is found that 
	     m2 = 
	m0 (1 - β2)-½ (24) 
	This implies, using equation (6), that 
	     m1 = 
	v dm2/dv +m2 = m0 (1 - β2)-3/2   
	(25) 
	Substituting the above results for m and L into 
	equations (10) and (21), we find that 
	     T1 = 
	T2 =  T0 (1 - β2)-½    
	(26) 
	Thus the clock rate is independent of the 
	clock's orientation. 
	
	In short, we have derived length contraction, 
	time dilation, and mass increase quite simply from classical mechanics and 
	electromagnetism. The above calculations were independent of the actual 
	size, mass, charge, or chemical composition of the clocks. Therefore the 
	formulas for length contraction and mass increase should hold for any moving 
	object.  
	One important consequence of this is that all 
	moving observers, when using e-m clocks, measure the speed of light to be c. 
	This can be shown as follows. Suppose the speed of light is determined by 
	measuring the time T taken for a light ray to travel back and forth along a 
	rod of length L with a mirror at one end. A stationary observer, S, measures 
	the time interval to be 
	     T0 = 
	2 L0/c    (27) 
	Now consider another observer, M, moving with 
	velocity v and with the rod inclined at an angle θ, as seen in M's 
	system, with respect to v. Due to length contraction, as given by 
	equations (22) and (23), the length of the rod becomes [4] 
	     L = L0(1 
	- β2)½/[1 - (β sinθ)2 ]½    
	(28) 
	In S's stationary frame the speed of light is 
	taken to be c in all directions. Applying the usual Galilean vector 
	addition, the speed of light in M's frame can readily be shown to be 
	     c' = [c2 
	- (v sinθ)2 ]½ + v cosθ    (29) 
	The time taken for a light ray to travel back 
	and forth along the rod is 
	     T = L/c'+ 
	+ L/c'-    (30) 
	where c'+ is the speed of light one 
	way, as given by equation (29), and c'- is the speed of light on 
	the return trip, v in equation (29) now being replaced by -v. This reduces 
	to 
	     T = 2 L0 
	(1 - β2)-½/c    (31) 
	This is the time as measured by S's clock. Since 
	M's clock is slow by a factor (1 - β2)-½, M measures 
	the time interval to be 2 L0/c. In other words, the time taken, 
	by M's clock, for a light ray to traverse M's moving rod is exactly the same 
	as the time measured, by S's clock, to traverse S's stationary rod. Since 
	M's standard meter has shrunk by the same fraction as his rod, he still 
	measures the rod to be a length of L0, in terms of his own 
	standard meter. Hence all observers obtain the same numerical result for the 
	speed of light, in terms of their own standard lengths and clocks, 
	regardless of their speed or the orientation of their rods. 
	Thus we have derived, simply from classical 
	physics, the relativistic postulate that the speed of light is the same for 
	all observers. From this, along with the above results, the Lorentz 
	transformations can readily be deduced. 
Although our Lorentzian approach ends up with the 
same equations as special relativity, their interpretation is 
quite different. The special relativistic effects are no longer symmetric for 
observers in relative motion. Instead, they are determined solely by motion with 
respect to the background space. Also, the effects are not merely apparent but 
real: lengths are actually shortened, clockrates are actually reduced and mass, 
as a measure of resistance against acceleration, is actually increased. 
 
This method has the advantage of avoiding the 
counter-intuitive aspects of Einstein's special relativity. For example, the 
twin paradox is resolved since one no longer expects symmetric aging. Further, 
it is now only the measured, rather than the actual, speed of 
light that is the same for all observers.  
In conclusion, we have shown that the equations of 
special relativity can be derived as a natural consequence of classical physics, 
thereby providing a more intuitive framework for interpreting special 
relativity. 
  
REFERENCES         
[1] J. Byl, "Special Relativity Via Electromagnetic 
Clocks", Galilean Electrodynamics 10 (No.6):107-110 (1999). 
[2] O. Heaviside, "The Electromagnetic Effects of a 
Moving Charge", The Electrician 22, 147-148 (1888).   
[3] O.D. Jefimenko, "Direct Calculation of Time 
Dilation", Am. J. Phys. 64(6), 812-814 (1996). 
[4] F. Selleri, "On the Meaning of Special 
Relativity If a Fundamental Frame Exists", in Progress in New Cosmologies: 
Beyond the Big Bang (edited by H.C. Arp et al, Plenum Press, New York, 
1993), pp.269-284. |