A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Simple question about SR paradox



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 27th 11, 11:38 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
Koobee Wublee
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 815
Default Simple question about SR paradox

On May 27, 12:23 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 5/27/11 5/27/11 - 12:37 PM, Ron Aikas wrote:

Geometry is not an explanation for different ages or different times
on clocks.


Using conventional meanings of words, it most definitely is an explanation for
different path lengths


Path length does not define elapsed time. shrug

The twin paradox is the same: the traveling twin traveled less distance through
spacetime than did the homebound twin. For such (timelike) paths, clocks measure
the path length traveled, just like the odometers in the previous paragraph. Of
course there are differences, and the analogy is not perfect, but they are in
the details, not the principle.


On May 27, 12:23 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 5/27/11 5/27/11 - 12:37 PM, Ron Aikas wrote:

Geometry is not an explanation for different ages or different times
on clocks.


Using conventional meanings of words, it most definitely is an explanation for
different path lengths


Path length does not define elapsed time. shrug

The twin paradox is the same: the traveling twin traveled less distance through
spacetime than did the homebound twin. For such (timelike) paths, clocks measure
the path length traveled, just like the odometers in the previous paragraph. Of
course there are differences, and the analogy is not perfect, but they are in
the details, not the principle.


The issue is about the elapsed time. You don’t understand the issue.
In doing so, you are just throwing all sorts of garbage out hoping to
continue your mysticism in SR. shrug

There are none so blind as those who refuse to look.


Like Tom refuses to acknowledge the issue of the twins’ paradox is the
elapsed time. No spacetime, no path length, etc. shrug

There are none so deaf as those who refuse to listen.


Like Tom refuses to listen and continue to embrace mysticism. shrug

There are none so stupid as those who refuse to think.


Just how difficult is it to understand the issue at hand under the
twins’ paradox is about elapsed time? Stupidity definitely is the
culprit. shrug
  #2  
Old May 28th 11, 12:55 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
Peter Webb[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 407
Default Simple question about SR paradox

Lets say there are two twins.

One twin makes a round trip to a distant sun for 20 years at 0.9c. One stays
at home.

SR predicts that when they are re-united, the travelling twin will have aged
less than the stay-at-home twin.

But you say SR is wrong about this.

What would be the relative ages of the twins when re-united? Same age,
travelling twin younger, or travelling twin older?



  #3  
Old May 28th 11, 01:00 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default Simple question about SR paradox

On 5/27/11 5:38 PM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On May 27, 12:23 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 5/27/11 5/27/11 - 12:37 PM, Ron Aikas wrote:

Geometry is not an explanation for different ages or different times
on clocks.


Using conventional meanings of words, it most definitely is an explanation for
different path lengths


Path length does not define elapsed time.shrug

The twin paradox is the same: the traveling twin traveled less distance through
spacetime than did the homebound twin. For such (timelike) paths, clocks measure
the path length traveled, just like the odometers in the previous paragraph. Of
course there are differences, and the analogy is not perfect, but they are in
the details, not the principle.


On May 27, 12:23 pm, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 5/27/11 5/27/11 - 12:37 PM, Ron Aikas wrote:

Geometry is not an explanation for different ages or different times
on clocks.


Using conventional meanings of words, it most definitely is an explanation for
different path lengths


Path length does not define elapsed time.shrug

The twin paradox is the same: the traveling twin traveled less distance through
spacetime than did the homebound twin. For such (timelike) paths, clocks measure
the path length traveled, just like the odometers in the previous paragraph. Of
course there are differences, and the analogy is not perfect, but they are in
the details, not the principle.


The issue is about the elapsed time. You don’t understand the issue.
In doing so, you are just throwing all sorts of garbage out hoping to
continue your mysticism in SR.shrug

There are none so blind as those who refuse to look.


Like Tom refuses to acknowledge the issue of the twins’ paradox is the
elapsed time. No spacetime, no path length, etc.shrug

There are none so deaf as those who refuse to listen.


Like Tom refuses to listen and continue to embrace mysticism.shrug

There are none so stupid as those who refuse to think.


Just how difficult is it to understand the issue at hand under the
twins’ paradox is about elapsed time? Stupidity definitely is the
culprit.shrug


The Twin Paradox for Koobee
http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/rel...section15.html
http://www.phys.vt.edu/~takeuchi/rel...notes/twin.gif



  #4  
Old May 28th 11, 02:09 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.math,sci.astro
Androcles[_43_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 87
Default Simple question about SR paradox


"Peter Webb" wrote in message
u...
| Lets say there are two twins.

Nah, let's say there are one twin or three twins, and they move
at 0.9% of the speed of gravity.





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Simple question about SR paradox Koobee Wublee Astronomy Misc 66 June 5th 11 01:15 AM
Simple question about SR paradox Koobee Wublee Astronomy Misc 68 May 26th 11 07:33 PM
Simple question about SR paradox Koobee Wublee Astronomy Misc 1 May 25th 11 12:35 AM
Simple question about SR paradox Koobee Wublee Astronomy Misc 3 May 24th 11 07:25 PM
HELP! - simple question! [email protected] Amateur Astronomy 10 May 2nd 05 06:59 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.