1

Whether or not a Body Form Depends on Acceleration?

Valery B. Morozov

A. Einsteins question is answered: How does a body form change under
acceleration?

1. In his famous work of 1907 [1] A. Einstein enunciated the following question:
At first, lets explore a body, for which is true that in some given time t in a non-
accelerating reference frame S, its separate material points are at rest against S but
along with it they themselves possess some acceleration. How does this acceleration
affects a form of this body in the reference frame S? In those days this question
without an answer.
However now we can predict the result. Knowing Einsteins solution of the
gravity equation for a uniform field [2]
Js
2
= _1 -
2u
c
2
] c
2
Jt
2
- _1 +
2u
c
2
] (Jx
2
+ Jy
2
+ Jz
2
),
(1)
it is possible (with aid of the equivalence principle) to relate this metric with a metric of
a uniformly accelerating reference frame. In order to do this, it is sufficient just
replacing a gravity potential u with a value of ineitia field potential of the uniformly
accelerating reference frame ox, where o is a proper acceleration of the points of this
frame. This suggests that in vicinities of a point A(x, y, z) of the uniformly accelerating
reference frame in a first approximation, a spatial scale should be a linear function of a
bias along the acceleration vector. However this is just a feasible proposal, which does
not follow directly from the relativity principle. That is why the answer to the headlined
question continues to be relevant even nowadays. In connection with this, a task is of
interest to find the metric of the uniformly accelerating reference frame without
resorting to the results of the general relativity theory.
2
An integral part of the relativity theory is the relativity of simultaneity. In
particular, indications of standard clocks depend not only on their speed but also on
their spatial location. This led Einstein to the proof that a frequency of the standard
clock at various points in an accelerated frame of reference is different even at zero
velocities of these points [1].
2. Lets be restricted with giving consideration to frames with one dimensional
motion along the x axis anu zero-relative velocity. In an accelerating reference frame N
lets choose two points A
0
and A
1
with coordinates x
0
= u and x
1
=
1
> u. Let us
assume that S is an inertial reference unit co-current to the point A
0
. A comparison of
frequencies of standard clock pendulum joints located in a point A
0
will show the same
result v
0
in both reference frames. Let us assume that a frequency of the standard clock
in the point A
1
is v
1
from a point of view of an observer from the frame S. Then
according to [1]
v
1
= v
0
(1 + o
1

1
c
2
), (2)
where o
1
is acceleration in the point A
1
. Or also allowable expression is the following
equivalent of the equation (2) connecting a proper time with the time t in the co-
moving frame of reference:
= t(1 + o c
2
). (2)
After a replacement with aid of applying of u = -ox, the equations are transformed
into the well-known ratio of the general relativity theory for the time in the stationary
gravity field [3].
Soon after, Einstein [4] entered an extremely simple proof of the ratio (2). Let us
assume that the points A
0
and A
1
in an instant of time t
0
= u in the inertial frame S had
zero velocity. If from the point A
0
in the instant of time t
0
, a light beam would be given
with a frequency v
0
, then in the instant of reaching of the point A
1
, this point will have
velocity o
1

1
c and that is why also higher frequency v
1
owing to Doppler's principle,
whence it follows expression (2). This expression is exact one in a limit o c
2
- u.
Einstein [1] noticed that (2) will not be changed, if this interval x changes on a small value,
as such dependence will give corrections of higher order on the parameter o c
2
.
3
This means that the expression (2) has a universal nature
1
as for its proof nothing is used
except of the relativity principle and the formula of Dopplers effect.
3. If to compare the standard clock frequencies in the reverse order, i.e. sending the light
signal from the point A
0
into the point A
2
with the coordinate x
2
= -
2
< u, well got
another result:
v
0
= v
2
(1 - o
2

2
c
2
), (3)
where o
2
is acceleration in the point A
2
. It is easy to check that the expressions (2) and
(3) coincide within the accuracy of second-order quantities of the parameter /c
2
. In this
approximation v
1
= v
2
, from which after multiplying out of the expressions (2) and (3), we
come to the equation
(1 + o
1

1
c
2
)(1 - o
2

2
c
2
) = 1. (4)
In the case thato
1
= o
2
and
1
=
2
, this equation has no nonzero solutions. This means
that no uniformly accelerating frames exist with persistence of the longitudinal scale.
On another hand, the persistence of the scale of the accelerating frame leads to the
equation
(1 + o
1
c
2
)(1 - o
2
c
2
) = 1.
This equation gives the acceleration dependence in a frame of a rigid type.
Nevertheless the subject of our interest is the uniformly accelerating frame. In
this case the equation
(1 + o
1
c
2
)(1 - o
2
c
2
) = 1.
has the solution

2
=
1
(1 + o
1
c
2
). (5)

________________________
1
Strangeasitmayseem,oftensomemisunderstandingstakeplaceconnectingwithachoiceoftimewithouttakinginto
considerationofratios(2)and(2').Sosometimesintuitionalstatements[5]occurthatiftheworldlinex = F(t)tracesa
pointmotiononaMinkowskyplane(x, t)withaconstantproperacceleration,thentheworldlinex = F(t) + Xhasthe
sameproperacceleration.Howeverfromtheequation(2')followsthatactuallyxcorrespondstovariousfunctionsofthe
propertimex = F((1 + o X c
2
)
-1
) + X.
4
Now we know how the longitudinal size of the uniformly accelerating frame varies. Pay into
attention that here there is no parallel with Lorentz contraction. In the point 0 of the
accelerating frame and in the same point of the inertial comoving frame S, small enough
body does not changes its size. In exactly the same way, standard clocks have the same
rate in both frames in the point 0. However in the case of a deviation in this or that
direction from the point 0, both length standards and standard clock rates differ (Fig. 1).
The equation (5) as well as the equation (2) are approximate ones, in which
small parameter is o c
2
.
4. The equations (2) and (5) allow receive metric of the uniformly accelerating
frame. For two remaining coordinates y and z, it is necessary to impose additionally a
condition of space uniformity in the accelerating frame. Then for the metric of the
uniformly accelerating frame within the accuracy of the parameter o c
2
, we obtain
Js
2
= (1 + 2o x c
2
)c
2
Jt
2
- (1 - 2 ox c
2
)(Jx
2
+ Jy
2
+ Jz
2
),
which coincides with the metric (1) under u = -ox. Such frame is of the rigid type in the
sense that its length of rules does not depend on time.
The author is grateful to M.B. Belonenko, Yu.N.Eroshenko and M.G.Ivanov for their
observation points, which made a strong impact on the material representation.
Fig. 1. Change of intervals ox = x - and ot = - t
in co-moving frame of point 0.
5
References
1. Einstein A ber das Relativittsprinzip und die aus demselben gezogenen
Folgerungen. Jahrb. d. Radioaktivitat u. Elektronik, 4, 411462 (1907).
2. Fock, V. A. "The Theory of Space, Time and Gravitation". Macmillan. (1964).
3. Landau L D, Lifshitz E M The Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon Press, Oxford,
1975).
4. Einstein A Uber den Einfluss der Schwerkraft auf die Ausbreitung des Lichtes. Ann.
Phys., 35, 898908. (1911).
5. Gershtein S.S., Logunov A.A., "Bell,J.S. problem", Physics of particles and nuclei,
29(5), 1998, pp. 463-468