The real twin paradox.
in [Relativity]
|
From: Daryl McCullough on 24 Nov 2007 11:54 colp says... >The point is that a paradox exists due to the time dilation expected >by SR. No, there is no paradox in the sense of contradiction. If you think that there is a contradiction, then *derive* it. Start with the assumptions of Special Relativity, and apply them and show that it leads to a contradiction through ordinary rules of mathematics. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
From: bz on 24 Nov 2007 11:08 colp <colp(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote in news:dcc9435e-926e-414e-9af9-2a636e701816(a)e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com: > On Nov 24, 10:59 pm, bz <bz+...(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >> colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote >> innews:2145a8d3-287f-4ac0-a232-46a77fb32680(a)s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com >> : >> >> >> >> > On Nov 24, 5:01 pm, bz <bz+...(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote: >> >> colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote >> >> innews:93dca4c9-c5c5-4708-9d0c-258e521aeb9b(a)s36g2000prg.googlegroups. >> >> com >> >> : >> >> >> > O.K. I see what you are saying now. But saying that they see a 1 >> >> > GHz signal for "a while" is a bit misleading because they only see >> >> > that signal for one instant in the entire journey. They start out >> >> > seeing a redshifted signal and end up seeing a blue shifted signal >> >> > so of course they've got to see the signal at it's natural >> >> > frequency at some point. >> >> >> No! It is much longer than a single instant. >> >> > The reason that it is only an instant is that redshift/blueshift >> > would be expected to occur for the receiver as well as the sender, >> > based on symmetry. Typically earth-bound receivers don't have to deal >> > with this issue, so it's no suprise that it didn't occur to you. >> >> > Your example said that the maximum signal transit time was longer >> > than the "a while" that it took for turnaround to occur. So by the >> > time the signal sent during turnaround got to the other twin, that >> > twin would be accelerating or cruising, so the 1GHz signal would be >> > blueshifted during observation and thus observed to be more than >> > 1GHz. >> >> There is NO doppler shift when both ships are moving in the same >> direction at the same velocity. > > That condition never occurs in the experiment. > > The point is that a paradox exists due to the time dilation expected > by SR. The length of time that a 1 GHz signal will be observed in your > example is incidental. Look at the number of days I cite for the trip segments. They are as predicted by SR. Everything adds up correctly. The accounts all balance. Two ships travel at .5 c away from each other for a year. They each turn around when they are .5 ly away from earth. At that point, they are 1 ly apart. They meet again on earth after 632.199 days. Their stay at home sister has counted 730 days by her clock since they left. They are 97.801 days younger than they would have been if they had stayed home. There are NO paradoxes. It works out exactly correct. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: bz on 24 Nov 2007 11:17 colp <colp(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote in news:09a47d39-3f20-4b0b-a7bc-b168ea09a0c4(a)s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com: ..... > > Considering that you have not denied that you made an error in the > opening post when you implied that observed time compression occurred > on the return leg, I will take your comment as a compliment. Dirk did NOT make a mistake [as I have been trying to show you], I suggest you let it go. Or are you trying for a special place in Dirks immortal fumbles pages? Google for it. -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Dirk Van de moortel on 24 Nov 2007 12:54 "bz" <bz+spr(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns99F268BCBE27EWQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > colp <colp(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote in > news:09a47d39-3f20-4b0b-a7bc-b168ea09a0c4(a)s12g2000prg.googlegroups.com: > > .... >> >> Considering that you have not denied that you made an error in the >> opening post when you implied that observed time compression occurred >> on the return leg, I will take your comment as a compliment. > > Dirk did NOT make a mistake [as I have been trying to show you], I suggest > you let it go. > > Or are you trying for a special place in Dirks immortal fumbles pages? > Google for it. Nah, it would be more of the same. Besides, he might be already in there under a different name. Nil novi sub sole. I suggest you let it go - let's keep him as ignorant as possible. We love it. He loves it. Win-Win. Dirk Vdm
From: Dono on 24 Nov 2007 12:59
On Nov 24, 7:22 am, colp <c...(a)solder.ath.cx> wrote: <...?> http://www.drunkmotherfucker.com/funny/dumbass.gif |