Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Series

Gravitational redshift — the series

4 essays on one idea, from the one that introduces it to the one that assumes the rest.
  1. Where a clock gains, and where it loses. The rate of a clock in a circular orbit against one on the ground, in microseconds per day, plotted against altitude. Height makes it gain and speed makes it lose, and the two cancel exactly at 3186 km — where a satellite keeps the same time as the ground for two reasons that have nothing to do with each other. At 20200 km the total is 38.5 µs a day, which is about ten kilometres of position error if it is ignored.

    The clock that runs slow lower down

    Two identical clocks, one on the floor and one on a shelf, do not keep the same time — and the difference is large enough that a satellite navigation system which ignored it would be useless within a morning. The derivation needs nothing but a photon and a conservation law.

    part 1 · astrophysics
  2. The figure a static field is not allowed to close. A spacetime diagram of two clocks held at fixed heights 22.5 metres apart, drawn as though spacetime were flat: time upward, height to the right, light at forty-five degrees. The lower clock sends two pulses; the upper clock receives them. Because the field does not change with time, nothing about the second pulse's journey differs from the first's, so the two null lines are congruent and the four worldlines bound a parallelogram. Opposite sides of a parallelogram in flat spacetime have equal length, so the proper time between emissions must equal the proper time between receptions, and the two clocks must agree. They do not: the measured fractional difference across a tower this tall is 2.455e-15, which Pound and Rebka established in 1960 and Pound and Snider confirmed to one per cent in 1964. Every step above is either a definition, an assumption of staticity, or a theorem of flat geometry — so the measurement refutes the flatness. No field equation has been written down, and none is needed: a laboratory result twenty-two metres tall is already incompatible with a flat spacetime.

    The parallelogram that will not close

    Two clocks twenty-two metres apart in a lift shaft run at different rates, by two parts in a thousand million million. That measurement, on its own, is enough to prove that spacetime cannot be flat — and the proof needs no field equation, no curvature tensor and no astronomy. It needs one drawing and the fact that opposite sides of a parallelogram are the same length.

    part 2 · astrophysics
  3. The height a clock can see. The fractional difference in rate between two clocks against how far apart in height they are, on logarithmic axes — a straight line of slope one, since the shift is gh/c² and comes to 1.09e-16 per metre near the ground. a caesium fountain, good to 1e-16, resolves 91.6 cm; an optical lattice clock, good to 1e-18, resolves 0.9 cm; the best clocks built, good to 8e-19, resolves 0.7 cm. The caesium fountains that define the second reach about a metre. The optical clocks that will replace them reach a centimetre, and the best of them a few millimetres. That is the whole of why this has stopped being a test of relativity and become a way of measuring the ground. A shift once so small that it took a Mössbauer experiment in a tower to see at all is now large enough to be a nuisance: two clocks in the same building disagree, and the disagreement has to be corrected for before either can be used to keep time.

    The clock that measures a height

    A clock a metre higher runs faster by a part in ten thousand million million million. That was once so small it took a tower and a Mössbauer source to see; the best clocks now resolve a centimetre of height, at any distance, without a line of sight. What began as a test of general relativity has become a surveying instrument that measures the quantity surveying actually wants.

    part 3 · astrophysics
  4. Both clocks move, and their ratio does not. Two years of a clock's fractional frequency against a distant clock (upper panel), and of the ratio of two unlike clocks kept side by side (lower panel). Above, both clocks slow as the Earth nears the Sun, with an amplitude of 1.65·10⁻¹⁰, and if the redshift is universal the two curves are one curve. Below, the ratio: the flat line is what universality predicts, and the sinusoid is what a clock responding to the potential 10⁻⁶ more strongly than the other would produce — an annual term of 1.65·10⁻¹⁶, a million times smaller than the shift both clocks share and within reach of clocks that compare to parts in 10¹⁷.

    The clocks that must all slow together

    Every clock on the Earth runs slower in January than in July, by three parts in ten thousand million, because the orbit carries the planet deeper into the Sun's potential at perihelion. No clock on the Earth can see this, and that invisibility is the claim worth testing. If the redshift is a property of time rather than of clocks, two clocks built on different physics must slow by exactly the same fraction, and their ratio must not move with the seasons. A ratio that did move would mean the constants of nature depend on where they are measured.

    part 4 · astrophysics

All series