I've been auditing a Relativity course on Coursera.  (It's pretty good.  This guy's a real clear thinker.)

In one of his lectures he gives the formula for calculating the amount of non synchronization between two moving clocks.  This is shown in the screen shot above.  He says its the distance between the two moving clocks in the rest frame (in the screen shot above this is both "L" in his drawing and "D" in his formula) times the relative velocity divided by the speed of light squared.

I have no reason to doubt him, but I just wanted to verify what he is saying by finding the same formula on another site (or sites).  The strange thing is that when I type in "non synchronized clocks math formula" on Google I can't find anything like the formula above.

So, I'm here to see if anyone knows if this is right the formula and if anyone knows of another web site with this formula (just for confirmation).

Thank you.

Try special relativity by Google.  There are plenty a links - something may have what you want.

It falls under the topic of the relativity of simultaneity.

The equation looks wrong. It's what you would get if gamma was one (approximately correct for very slow speeds)

t' = gamma(t-vx/c^2)

On 9/29/2017 at 0:42 PM, thomas reid said:

I've been auditing a Relativity course on Coursera.  (It's pretty good.  This guy's a real clear thinker.)

In one of his lectures he gives the formula for calculating the amount of non synchronization between two moving clocks.  This is shown in the screen shot above.  He says its the distance between the two moving clocks in the rest frame (in the screen shot above this is both "L" in his drawing and "D" in his formula) times the relative velocity divided by the speed of light squared.

I have no reason to doubt him, but I just wanted to verify what he is saying by finding the same formula on another site (or sites).  The strange thing is that when I type in "non synchronized clocks math formula" on Google I can't find anything like the formula above.

So, I'm here to see if anyone knows if this is right the formula and if anyone knows of another web site with this formula (just for confirmation).

Thank you.

forum1.pdf

It's correct.