hefner Posted January 7, 2005 Report Share Posted January 7, 2005 Yes, this is a very belated reply, sorry. I read some stuff hereabove about acceleration breaking the symmetry, and I read some stuff about Earth being at a local near-zero velocity. But neither concept resolves the Twin Paradox. Of course, almost everyone realizes that Earth's frame of reference has no preferential value whatsoever. As for acceleration, yes it breaks the symmetry but it definitely does NOT imply that the one who accelerates is the one who is "truly" moving and hence is the one who must "truly" be ascribed time dilation. No, the Twin Paradox is a common stumbling block because folks fail to realize that there are THREE distinct distortions associated with Special Relativity, and all three of them need to be ciphered in to any resolution of a scenario. You can NOT take time dilation alone and examine it, and expect things to work out without contradictions. You HAVE to include in your analysis length contraction and clock dissynchronicity. That third one is most frequently overlooked, but it is just as much a mainstay as the other two. Only when all THREE of these elements are applied in harmony do things work out correctly. Maybe this will help: my essay, Twin Paradox without Accelerations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted January 7, 2005 Report Share Posted January 7, 2005 You HAVE to include in your analysis length contraction and clock dissynchronicity. That third one is most frequently overlooked, but it is just as much a mainstay as the other two. Only when all THREE of these elements are applied in harmony do things work out correctly. Maybe this will help: my essay, Twin Paradox without Accelerations. Good post, hefner. I can't vouch for it's correctness (not my job) but very interesting article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted January 8, 2005 Report Share Posted January 8, 2005 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. From each local frame of reference the other twin is in motion. It doesn't matter. You see yourself not moving you clock is normal. It is only once that clocks are comparedthat slowest clock was the one in motion the fastest. This is how it works. No otherway... :) Maddog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts