HackerPapers

arXiv:1604.05507physics.ed-ph

The young centre of the Earth

Ulrik I. Uggerhoj, Rune E. Mikkelsen, Jan Faye

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

We treat, as an illustrative example of gravitational time dilation in relativity, the observation that the center of the Earth is younger than the surface by an appreciable amount. Richard Feynman first made this insightful point and presented an estimate of the size of the effect in a talk; a transcription was later published in which the time difference is quoted as 'one or two days'. However, a back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that the result is in fact a few years. In this paper we present this estimate alongside a more elaborate analysis yielding a difference of two and a half years. The aim is to provide a fairly complete solution to the relativity of the 'aging' of an object due to differences in the gravitational potential. This solution - accessible at the undergraduate level - can be used for educational purposes, as an example in the classroom. Finally, we also briefly discuss why exchanging 'years' for 'days' - which in retrospect is a quite simple, but significant, mistake - has been repeated seemingly uncritically, albeit in a few cases only. The pedagogical value of this discussion is to show students that any number or observation, no matter who brought it forward, must be critically examined.

arXiv comments
Published version, apart from minor editing (e.g. corrections of 'center' to 'centre')
Journal reference
Eur.J.Phys. vol. 37, 035602 (2016)
DOI
doi:10.1088/0143-0807/37/3/035602
Subjects
physics.ed-phPhysics Education physics.pop-phPopular Physics

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 1 comment across 1 thread, from Apr 2024 to Apr 2024. Found in 1 HN submission from Nov 2019 to Nov 2019. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments1 thread

    • tl;dr on this long comment: the article is about a 1960s mistake and how a paper demonstrates an improved model Earth that has non-uniform density can do better than the simplest fix. New Scientist gets an important bit of science wrong, surprise. And some links to even deeper…

      raattgiftView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.