How does mutual time dilation work with one twin aging faster?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Applying Torque to rotating objects in 3d space
Next: atomic characteristics appearing as cosmic characteristics; does the cosmos have two poles, and thus a spin?? chapt18; Galaxy evidence #264 Atom Totality
From: PD on 9 Aug 2010 18:44 On Aug 9, 5:21 pm, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "Koobee Wublee" <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:9bd0cd7c-deeb-4d09-bfa9-90edec5d97eb(a)f6g2000pro.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Aug 8, 10:26 am, stevendaryl3...(a)yahoo.com wrote: > > >> It's not so mysterious. Think about traveling along the x-axis. > >> If you travel at a constant speed for 1 hour elapsed time, you'll > >> end up a certain distance from your starting point. If you travel > >> twice as fast, you'll end up twice as far from your starting > >> point. There's nothing mysterious about that. > > >> Now, people are always traveling at a nonzero velocity in the > >> t-direction. > >> If you travel for one hour, you'll end up at a different time then when > >> you started. If you travel for one hour at twice at twice the velocity > >> in the t-direction, you'll end up twice as far along the t-axis. > > >> The 4-D view of SR is that every object has a velocity in the > >> x-direction, > >> the y-direction, the z-direction and the t-direction. Different travelers > >> have different velocities in the t-direction, so they travel different > >> distances along the t-axis. > > >> Rather than thinking one twin ages 1 hour while the other ages 1/2 hour, > >> instead you think that one twin takes a full hour to go from 12:00 to > >> 1:00, > >> while the other twin only takes 1/2 hour to go the same distance along > >> the t-axis. > > > Einstein Dingleberries are getting sillier and sillier defending their > > piles of nonsense. Ahahahaha... > > Is there a single experimental prediction of Special Relativity that you > disagree with, or do you believe that its predictions exactly match reality? KW doesn't care whether the theory matches experiment. KW has a different view of science: - If a mediocre engineer doesn't understand it, it must be wrong. - If you can discredit one of the original proponents with name- calling, it must be wrong. - If you claim that its results are "nothing more than" results found by others, then it must be wrong. - If you claim that the mathematics "obviously" has properties that are in conflict with its predictions, then it must be wrong.
From: Androcles on 9 Aug 2010 18:45 "RichD" <r_delaney2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:60ffc926-c559-4f44-a7a8-bb45d78a17a3(a)l25g2000prn.googlegroups.com... On Aug 8, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > If you watched a clock that you are passing at high speed; if you are > > the one aging slower how can you see that it is aging more than you > > but ticking slower than you at the same time? > > All the important stuff in the twin paradox happens when the twin > in the spacecraft feels acceleration (it has to turn at some point > if it comes back to earth). The "aging difference effect" happens > just when the acceleration does. What if the high speed traveling twin continues in a straight line for a trillion years, and returns to the same spot via the curvature of space (assuming the universe is closed), without turning around, hence no acceleration - what does the twin paradox predict then? -- Rich ===================================== Err... the twins are a trillion years old, perhaps?
From: RichD on 9 Aug 2010 22:10 On Aug 9, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > What if the high speed traveling twin continues in a > > straight line for a trillion years, and returns to the > > same spot via the curvature of space (assuming the > > universe is closed), without turning around, hence no > > acceleration - what does the twin paradox predict then? > > The universe is flat. No twins are going to leave each other > and return without accelerations involved. Don't fool yourself. ? I thought the universe is closed, spacetime curves on itself, etc. How can it also be flat? Does not compute - -- Rich
From: Sam Wormley on 9 Aug 2010 22:15 On 8/9/10 9:10 PM, RichD wrote: > > I thought the universe is closed, spacetime curves > on itself, etc. How can it also be flat? Does not compute - > The observable universe is finite an unbounded. No Center http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html
From: BURT on 9 Aug 2010 22:57
On Aug 9, 7:07 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > On Aug 8, 10:48 pm, Mathal <mathmusi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 8, 7:27 am, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 8 elo, 17:18, Mathal <mathmusi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 8, 6:53 am, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:> On 8 elo, 08:06, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > If you watched a clock that you are passing at high speed; if you are > > > > > > the one aging slower how can you see that it is aging more than you > > > > > > but ticking slower than you at the same time? > > > > > > All the important stuff in the twin paradox happens when the twin in > > > > > the spacecraft feels acceleration (it has to turn at some point if it > > > > > comes back to earth). The "aging difference effect" happens just when > > > > > the acceleration does. > > > > > No. The aging difference effect is due to a difference in relative > > > > velocity. If you get up and go for a walk you will be younger than the > > > > 'you' who decided instead to just sit in one place. Not much younger, > > > > but younger. > > > > No, your proper time is of course different then and that is solely > > > because you _felt more acceralation_. > > > No. When the ship decelerates and returns, while the ship is > > motionless WRT the other twin, the twins experience the same rate of > > time and again when the ship with the travelling twin returns and > > stops in the frame of the stationary twin they share the same rate of > > time. At all other moments when the relative velocity of the frames > > differs, the difference in the time-span that occurs in the two frames > > increases. It is necessarily the travelling twin's clock (his frame) > > that is moving slower (time-wise) that the stationary twin. > > > It is the velocity, not the acceleration. I'll give you this, you > > can't get from an initial shared state of rest to two frames moving > > WRT each other without acceleration, but there deosn't need to be any > > more than the initial aceleration i.e. the velocity can be constant > > for the majority of the trip. > > The acceleration of the traveling clock increases its state of > absolute motion and thus makes it runs slower than the stay at home > clock. > > Ken Seto > > > > > > > Mathal > > By the way, when did the Linus blaket term 'proper time' come back > > into vogue?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Accelerated energy flow decelerates aether flow in an inverse Gamma relationship. Accelerating energy decelerates its clock by Gamma for its speed. Mitch Raemsch |