|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...de128ca7e50362
Tom Roberts: "In the usual scenario, one has multiple assistants all at rest in the measurement frame, each with a clock synchronized in the measurement frame with all the others; assistants are pre- positioned along the path of the moving clock. When the moving clock passes each assistant, he records the value of his clock and the value of the moving clock. The multiple recordings are then combined into a single measurement of the rate of the moving clock." Those multiple (at least two) assitants making "multiple recordings" are an INDISPENSABLE tool in a system that is to measure time dilation. Einsteiniana's thought experiments have always endowed the sedentary twin's system with, and deprived the travelling twin's system of, such a tool. Just place two clocks e.g. et the front and back ends of the travelling twin's rocket and then any thought experiment where these two clocks play an essential role would show the greater youthfulness of the SEDENTARY twin (of course Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate should be assumed to be true). Pentcho Valev |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
By increasing the perimeter of a rotating disc while keeping the
linear speed of the periphery constant, one converts clocks fixed on the periphery into VIRTUALLY INERTIAL clocks (the "gravitational field" they experience is reduced to zero). Then, in accordance with Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate, a clock at rest situated outside the disc, near the periphery, will be seen running SLOWER than the virtually inertial clocks passing it. (If a single inertial clock covers the distance between two other inertial clocks immobile relative to one another, then the single clock runs slower than the two other clocks.) Another prediction based on Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate is that the clock at rest will be seen running FASTER than the virtually inertial clocks passing it ( http://www2.bartleby.com/173/23.html ). Clearly we have REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM showing that Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate is false. Pentcho Valev |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
In Einsteiniana's schizophrenic world absurdities develop into
absolute idiocies. So compared with Seth Lloyd's "closed timelike curves" the humble "travel to the future" involved in the twin paradox sounds almost reasonable: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-03-...r-paradox.html "Among the many intriguing concepts in Einsteins relativity theories is the idea of closed timelike curves (CTCs), which are paths in spacetime that return to their starting points. As such, CTCs offer the possibility of traveling back in time. But, as many science fiction films have addressed, time travel is full of potential paradoxes. Perhaps the most notable of these is the grandfather paradox, in which a time traveler goes back in time and kills her grandfather, preventing her own birth. In a new study, a team of researchers has proposed a new theory of CTCs that can resolve the grandfather paradox, and they also perform an experiment showing how such a scheme works. The researchers, led by Seth Lloyd from MIT, along with scientists from the Scuola Normale Superiore in Pisa, Italy; the University of Pavia in Pavia, Italy; the Tokyo Institute of Technology; and the University of Toronto, have published their study in a recent issue of Physical Review Letters. The concepts in the study are similar to an earlier study by some of the same authors that was posted at arXiv.org last year. "Einstein's theory of general relativity supports closed timelike curves," Lloyd told PhysOrg.com. "For decades researchers have argued over how to treat such objects quantum mechanically. We believe that our theory is the correct theory of such objects. Moreover, our theory shows how time travel might be accomplished even in the absence of general relativistic closed timelike curves." Pentcho Valev |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
Destruction of human rationality in Einsteiniana's schizophrenic
world: http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions David Morin, Cambridge University Press Chapter 11, p. 14: "Example (Twin paradox): Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a distant star and back. Show that B is younger than A when they meet up again. (...) For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B does observe A's clock running slow, but enough strangeness occurs during the turning-around period to make A end up older. Note, however, that a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox, as Problem 11.2 shows." The fact that "a discussion of acceleration is not required to quantitatively understand the paradox" makes believers sing "Divine Einstein" and "Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity": http://www.haverford.edu/physics/songs/divine.htm No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein Not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! He explained the photo-electric effect, And launched quantum physics with his intellect! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel -- He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein -- Egad, could that guy derive! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! Brownian motion, my true devotion, He mastered back in aught-five! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity. Einstein's postulates imply That planes are shorter when they fly. Their clocks are slowed by time dilation And look warped from aberration. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, 8.033, relativity. http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...yon/index.html John Norton: "Now consider the judgments of simultaneity of the traveling twin, as shown in the spacetime diagram opposite. Since the traveling twin is moving very rapidly, the traveler's hypersurfaces of simultaneity are quite tilted. Two hypersurfaces of simultaneity are shown in the lower part of the diagram for the outward part of the traveler's journey. These are the hypersurfaces that pass through the event at which the clock reads 1 day and just before the turn-around at the traveler's clock time of 2 days. We read from these hypersurfaces that the traveling twin judges the stay-at-home twin's clock to be running at half the speed of the travelers. When the traveler's clock reads 1 day, the stay-at-home twin's reads 1/2 day; just before the turn around, when the traveler's clock is almost at 2 days, the stay-at-home twin's clock is almost at 1 day. Then, at the end of the outward leg, the traveler abruptly changes motion, accelerating sharply to adopt a new inertial motion directed back to earth. What comes now is the key part of the analysis. The effect of the change of motion is to alter completely the traveler's judgment of simultaneity. The traveler's hypersurfaces of simultaneity now flip up dramatically. Moments after the turn-around, when the travelers clock reads just after 2 days, the traveler will judge the stay-at-home twin's clock to read just after 7 days. That is, the traveler will judge the stay-at-home twin's clock to have jumped suddenly from reading 1 day to reading 7 days. This huge jump puts the stay-at-home twin's clock so far ahead of the traveler's that it is now possible for the stay-at-home twin's clock to be ahead of the travelers when they reunite." The ecstasy gets uncontrollable - believers tumble to the floor, start tearing their clothes and go into convulsions. Pentcho Valev |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dialog...f_rela tivity
Dialog about Objections against the Theory of Relativity (1918), by Albert Einstein "...according to the special theory of relativity the coordinate systems K and K' are by no means equivalent systems. Indeed this theory asserts only the equivalence of all Galilean (unaccelerated) coordinate systems, that is, coordinate systems relative to which sufficiently isolated, material points move in straight lines and uniformly. K is such a coordinate system, but not the system K', that is accelerated from time to time. Therefore, from the result that after the motion to and fro the clock U2 is running behind U1, no contradiction can be constructed against the principles of the theory. (...) During the partial processes 2 and 4 the clock U1, going at a velocity v, runs indeed at a slower pace than the resting clock U2. However, this is more than compensated by a faster pace of U1 during partial process 3. According to the general theory of relativity, a clock will go faster the higher the gravitational potential of the location where it is located, and during partial process 3 U2 happens to be located at a higher gravitational potential than U1. The calculation shows that this speeding ahead constitutes exactly twice as much as the lagging behind during the partial processes 2 and 4. This consideration completely clears up the paradox that you brought up." The arguments of "Relativist" (more precisely, of Albert Einstein in his 1918 infamous paper) in proving that the travelling twin returns younger resemble the arguments of "Owner" in proving that the dead parrot is both alive and beautiful: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218 Owner: Oh yes, the, uh, the Norwegian Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it? Mr. Praline: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'E's dead, that's what's wrong with it! Owner: No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting. Mr. Praline: Look, matey, I know a dead parrot when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now. Owner: No no he's not dead, he's, he's restin'! Remarkable bird, the Norwegian Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful plumage! ......................... Mr. Praline: No, I'm sorry! I'm not prepared to pursue my line of inquiry any longer as I think this is getting too silly! Note the unavoidable total frustration of anyone pursuing some rational "line of inquiry" in a schizophrenic environment. This is perhaps the main reason why Einstein's relativity has been so vital and so beautiful for so long. Pentcho Valev |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A CLUE TO THE TWIN PARADOX
In Cambridge (but not elsewhere) the acceleration suffered by the
travelling twin is unimportant: http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/...tivity2010.pdf Gary W. Gibbons FRS: "In other words, by simply staying at home Jack has aged relative to Jill. There is no paradox because the lives of the twins are not strictly symmetrical. This might lead one to suspect that the accelerations suffered by Jill might be responsible for the effect. However this is simply not plausible because using identical accelerating phases of her trip, she could have travelled twice as far. This would give twice the amount of time gained." Pentcho Valev |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
TWIN PARADOX OR TWIN ABSURDITY? | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 111 | November 25th 10 12:41 PM |
TWIN PARADOX OR TWIN ABSURDITY? | Androcles[_33_] | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | November 2nd 10 04:12 PM |
The twin paradox revisited | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 6 | July 11th 07 01:47 AM |
The twin paradox revisited | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | July 10th 07 08:19 PM |
Twin non-paradox. Only one explanation. | Der alte Hexenmeister | Astronomy Misc | 40 | January 12th 06 02:00 AM |