The Symmetric Twin Paradox
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Black Hole is Black Day for Earth
Next: n-stars.
From: Dave Doe on 16 Jun 2010 08:56 In article <fff81c16-7451-420a-a943-fa07db675ae8 @h13g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, koobee.wublee(a)gmail.com says... > > On Jun 15, 11:25 pm, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > The classic twin paradox is asymmetric in that one twin remains on > > Earth while the other leaves (i.e. only one of them accelerates and > > deaccelerates). > > Let me chime in. There have been no experiments showing that > accelerating does indeed exhibit any time dilation. So, the classical > resolution as proposed by Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the > liar is totally bullshit in the first place. <shrug> Don't be silly! - this is routinely proven - and used everyday in the GPS system... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPS#Special_and_general_relativity -- Duncan.
From: Inertial on 16 Jun 2010 09:05 "colp" <colp(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote in message news:267c724a-a11c-4cfe-ae6d-b5b9395cf382(a)a39g2000prb.googlegroups.com... > The classic twin paradox is asymmetric in that one twin remains on > Earth while the other leaves (i.e. only one of them accelerates and > deaccelerates). Yeup .. tho its not a paradox.. just a little unexpected > In the symmetric twin paradox both twins leave Earth, > setting out in opposite directions and returning to Earth at the same > time. And so age the same > The conventional explanation for the classic twin paradox is > since only one twin accelerates, the ages of the twins will be > different. In the symmetric case this argument cannot be applied. Because it doesn't > The paradox of the symmetric twins is that according to special > relativity (SR) each twin observes the other twin to age more slowly > both on the outgoing leg > and the return leg, so SR paradoxically predicts that each twin will > be younger than > the other when they return to Earth. No .. it doesn't > The symmetric twin paradox is described more fully in the following > paper: > > The Twin Paradox Revisited and Reformulated -- On the Possibility of > Detecting Absolute Motion > Authors: G. G. Nyambuya, M. D. Ngobeni What a load of rot > http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008arXiv0804.2008N > > "We introduce a symmetric twin paradox whose solution can not be found > within the currently accepted provinces of the STR if one adopts the > currently accepted philosophy of the STR namely that it is impossible > for an inertial observer to determine their state of motion." What a load of rot
From: hagman on 16 Jun 2010 13:12 On 16 Jun., 09:21, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 11:25 pm, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > The classic twin paradox is asymmetric in that one twin remains on > > Earth while the other leaves (i.e. only one of them accelerates and > > deaccelerates). > > Let me chime in. There have been no experiments showing that > accelerating does indeed exhibit any time dilation. So, the classical > resolution as proposed by Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the > liar is totally bullshit in the first place. <shrug> Of course, such experiments have been made with fast-moving atomic clocks, say.. The time differences were more subtle than with a twin moving at almost c for a long time, but fully consistent with Einstein's theory. > > In the symmetric twin paradox both twins leave Earth, > > setting out in opposite directions and returning to Earth at the same > > time. > > Thanks, yours truly has brought this up earlier. <shrug> > > > The conventional explanation for the classic twin paradox is > > since only one twin accelerates, the ages of the twins will be > > different. In the symmetric case this argument cannot be applied. > > That is true. Not to mention that twins with the same acceleration > profile can also coast away without any acceleration for some random > time. This will enter into the time dilation in which there is > absolutely no mathematical remedy or resolution for that one. <shrug> > > > The paradox of the symmetric twins is that according to special > > relativity (SR) each twin observes the other twin to age more slowly > > both on the outgoing leg > > and the return leg, so SR paradoxically predicts that each twin will > > be younger than > > the other when they return to Earth. > > Don't expect the self-styled physicists to understand that one. They > are indeed morons who cannot even understand or comprehend the most > basic of logics. <shrug> In order to level out the effects of the intermediate period of acceleration each twin will be better off, calculation-wise, to resort to some inertial system. Why not the point they started from and meet again? > > > The symmetric twin paradox is described more fully in the following > > paper: > > >http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008arXiv0804.2008N > > > "We introduce a symmetric twin paradox whose solution can not be found > > within the currently accepted provinces of the STR if one adopts the > > currently accepted philosophy of the STR namely that it is impossible > > for an inertial observer to determine their state of motion." > > I wonder how many times this has come up in the past 100 years. Each > time, it would be left under the rug. Some would call that science, > but true scholars of physics would call that fraudulent. <shrug> > > <sigh> It helps the scientific approach if the self-styled physicists > possess any intelligence to comprehend the most basic of logics. > <shrug> > > Oh, some Einstein Dingleberries have already hypnotized themselves > into believing that SR does not matter, but GR will come to rescue as > that knight in white armor. That is another chapter of discussions. > Anyhow, these are a bunch of delusional nincompoops who worship > Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar as a god, and > zealously gulping down servings after servings of fermented diarrhea > of Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar. <shrug> > > Tragic in the academic world if you ask me. <shrug>
From: Androcles on 16 Jun 2010 13:18 "hagman" <google(a)von-eitzen.de> wrote in message news:cbe25fc1-05df-4c97-a27f-284d43188533(a)y4g2000yqy.googlegroups.com... On 16 Jun., 09:21, Koobee Wublee <koobee.wub...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 11:25 pm, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > The classic twin paradox is asymmetric in that one twin remains on > > Earth while the other leaves (i.e. only one of them accelerates and > > deaccelerates). > > Let me chime in. There have been no experiments showing that > accelerating does indeed exhibit any time dilation. So, the classical > resolution as proposed by Einstein the nitwit, the plagiarist, and the > liar is totally bullshit in the first place. <shrug> Of course, such experiments have been made with fast-moving atomic clocks, say.. The time differences were more subtle than with a twin moving at almost c for a long time, but fully consistent with Einstein's theory. =============================================== Handwaving bullshit. You are a LIAR.
From: Dono. on 16 Jun 2010 14:03
On Jun 15, 11:25 pm, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: > > > The Twin Paradox Revisited and Reformulated -- On the Possibility of > Detecting Absolute Motion > Authors: G. G. Nyambuya, M. D. Ngobeni > > http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008arXiv0804.2008N > So, two idiots wrote a paper and uploaded it on arxiv. BFD. The first two references are precious: [2] Cahill T. R., 2007, Dynamical 3-Space: A Review; arXiv:0705.4146 [2] Cahill T. R., 2008, Unravelling Lorentz Covariance and the Spacetime Formalism;arXiv:0807.1767 |