Jump to content
Science Forums

Twin paradox?


Tim_Lou

Recommended Posts

ok, lets say there is a twin on earth, a twin in a space ship.

 

the space ship travels near the speed of light, which the local time is slower than the "earth" time in the frame of the twin on earth.

 

after years as they meet on the earth, the twin on the space ship aged less than that on the earth.

 

i understand this part.

 

but what if according to the frame of the twin in the space ship?

relative to that frame, it is the earth that is moving away.

so, it is right to say that the twin on the earth aged slower than the twin on the space ship according to the space ship frame? so, after a couple years, the twin on earth appear to have aged less than the twin on the space ship when the twin on the space ship comes back to earth???

 

but, doesnt it contradict the first part??

im confused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll see if I can explain it, but I'm sure others are more apt at this than me.

 

I think that even though you can say the Earth is also moving away from the spaceship, we have to keep in mind that what is actually moving at (near) light speed in reference to something, is the spaceship. The Earth is not moving at a relativistic speed because it is still moving in orbit around the Sun, which orbits the galaxy, which is a part of the larger universe.

 

But the spacesgip is in an isolated reference frame. It does not only move relative to the Earth but also relative to everything else.

 

Here is a thorough explanation of the twin paradox:

 

http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/twin.html

 

There is a nifty animation on that page, but it takes some reading to really get what it is illustrating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it is important to remember that the twin on the space ship has to accelerate in order to lift off, penetrate the atmosphere, and escape Earth's gravitational pull, as well decelerate in order to near Earth and eventually land. We can only say that either of the twins is moving away from the other as long as both are undergoing uniform motion - which in this case, they are not.

 

- Alisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i guess a better phrase to that question would be what would happen if the twins are moving relative to each other in space at a constant speed... they start from very far away, moving close to the speed of light, and meet at a certain point in space.

 

would the twin paradox be gone this way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim_Lou,

 

It applies to both. Both twins would think that the other is younger, as long as we have uniform motion. However, when the twin in the spaceship returns to Earth, it is obvious that HE had been the one to accelerate, and thus the symmetry is broken.

 

I suggest Brian Greene's "The Elegant Universe" for a clear and simple explanantion. Way too much to type, sorry. = ) He provides actual examples using some weirdos named Gracie, George, Slim, and Jim. Heh.

 

- Alisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there evidence to eliminate this hypothesis?

 

For this location of space there is a velocity which is absolute zero*. The Earth is, in relativistic terms, close to that velocity. When our travelling twin zips off in his space ship he is time dilated because he has a relativistic (close to C) velocity when measured against the local absolute zero.

 

*The universe is expanding, or perhaps just appearing to expand. The local absolute zero will be such that velocities of distant galaxies balance out, as appearing at that point. That is zero velocity with respect to the contents of the universe in general, and presumably thus the universe itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there evidence to eliminate this hypothesis?

 

When our travelling twin zips off in his space ship he is time dilated because he has a relativistic (close to C) velocity when measured against the local absolute zero.

But the Earth twin would have a "relativistic (close to C) velocity when measured against the local absolute zero" of the frame for the space ship twin.

 

The different time dilations can not be based on comparisons to the other as the difference is the same while all that is changed is the frame of reference wtih each being equally valid and each being equally valid as a PoR (Point of Reference). It is only to some common external PoR that each's dilation would be based and measured and cause a difertiation between the two's special frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there evidence to eliminate this hypothesis?

 

I don't understand where that question comes from... Regarding my latter post? It's simple relativistic properties:

 

1.) Any frame of reference in uniform motion is as credibe as any other frame in uniform motion.

2.) Acceleration of any sort by either of the two parties breaks the symmetry between them.

 

If you were asking for experimental data, I don't believe so. This is due to the fact that any signal sent out by either of the two parties would not travel instantaneouly, and would also be subjected to relativistic weirdness. The end result would be that upon receiving the respective signals, both parties would conclude that they are aging faster than the other.

 

However, once either breaks the symmetry, we clearly see who is aging slower and who is aging faster.

 

- Alisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Divine

 

The question comes from my own interests. I have been playing with models of the universe, and the one I gave has been interesting me for some time.

 

I was indeed asking for experimental data, or perhaps deductions supported by experimental data. I already know that the model is not in accordance with current thinking.

 

All

 

Please note that I do not reply to posts from Freethinker. If you want a reply from me for a point he has made, you will have to make it yourself too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Divine

 

The question comes from my own interests. I have been playing with models of the universe, and the one I gave has been interesting me for some time.

 

I was indeed asking for experimental data, or perhaps deductions supported by experimental data. I already know that the model is not in accordance with current thinking.

I believe I have read about experiments with atomic clocks onboard aeroplanes. Apparently there was a measurable difference between those clocks and atomic clocks on the ground. This was because of the slightly weaker gravity field at the altitude. I'm not sure if such an experiment has been made regarding speed, except in particle accelerators, where particles "live" longer when they are accelerated to speeds near the speed of light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What Stargazer said reminded me of muon decay! Muons are only supposed to exist for a few milliseconds, but due to time dilation, their decay process is slowed down, and they thus exist for much longer than they "normally should". That's clear evidence of TR.

 

I thought you were asking for evidence in support of the whole twin symmetry where both twins perceive the other as aging slower. I'm not sure if there has ever been real "evidence" for that, because evidence in itself would disprove the symmetry (information sent out is also subjected to relativistic effectts, and should thus not be able to distinguish between the two subjects - unless the symmetry between them is broken).

 

- Alisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stargazer

 

A clock aboard an aeroplane will be affected by spin. That is, if it travels round the earth in the direction of the earth's rotation, it will be slowed down. In the reverse direction, so that it counters the earths spin, it will speed up.

 

However, that is not the question I am asking. I want to know if their is evidence that "speed" of time is not fixed to a locally valid zero velocity in space, as opposed to fixed to the observers frame of reference. We already know that there is a valid zero spin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlameTheEx,

 

If I understand you correctly, you raise a very interesting question. I have never heard of this being done, but in theory, it should be possible, since the signals traveling from one region you are testing to another do not necessarily have to undergo relativistic "distortions", and could thus prove time "fluctuations" in the same reference frame.

 

- Alisa

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to know if their is evidence that "speed" of time is not fixed to a locally valid zero velocity in space, as opposed to fixed to the observers frame of reference.

But is it possible to have a "locally valid zero velocity in space"? Would the sun be such? It is what we primarily base Earth's movements on. Yet we also base the sun's "velocity" based on movement to the center of the galaxy. But what do we base the velocity of the center of the G on? Other Galaxies? As we do not consider the Universe to have a center.

 

What would a "locally valid zero velocity in space" look like? If we were to estalish one instantly in our heliosphere, would we immediately move away from it? As not only this planet, but the whole solar system?

 

If it is possible, what about two of them? Would they maintain the distance between them? Or would any two "locally valid zero velocity in space" locations always have a velocity between them? Based on Expansion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...