Talk:Synchronous coordinates

I know it's just an article stub, but this is awful, horrible!

edit

In the equation, everything after the "minus d t squared" is defined incompletely, if at all. I know SR pretty well, and I have no idea what "h" is or what and b represent, much less multiplying them all together in various combinations. All I can tell is that this is some kind of mutant bastard child of the Lorentz metric where h, a, and b grow out of it like a tumor. 67.162.165.126 (talk) 05:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Merge with Synchronous frame?

edit

The other article is more complete and I think the difference between a synchonous frame and synchronous coordinates is sufficiently small that one article that explains both would make more sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.225.212.4 (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

Suggestion: explicit experimental interpretation

edit

I would suggest adding:

Synchronous coordinates can be physically/experimentally interpreted as:

Take any single coordinate point   and two test particles  ,   being the calibration of two identical clocks on the test particles, positioned at   ; but with   having different velocities and subsequently following their respective geodesic paths.

After proper time   for both   they will be at co-ordinates   ; where   are the respectively spacelike position coordinates resulting from the individual geodesics paths.


And no I am not able to prove this from the form of the metric yet; but would like a proof. Ray Rrogers314 (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Including an additional s coordinate as calibration complicates things with the metric. For example, we can't be sure that after the 2 particles move to different points in the curved space, s and t+s will be the same for both. Lantonov (talk) 09:19, 7 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Move back to "Synchronous coordinates" ?

edit

I am hesitating between the article being titled "Synchronous (reference) frame" and "Synchronous coordinates". The first one is used more often and is somewhat more precise. However, an average reader would tend to mix it with "Synchronous reference frame (SRF) theory" as used in electrical engineering to denote a frame that rotates at a synchronous speed with an application in 3-phase controls. Another possible solution is a disambiguation as "Synchronous reference frame (relativity)" and "Synchronous reference frame (electrical engineering)". Lantonov (talk) 19:56, 15 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Fortunately, we still don't have Synchronous reference frame connected to electrical engineering so leave title in peace for now and disambiguate only when needed. Lantonov (talk) 09:07, 7 August 2018 (UTC)Reply