How does mutual time dilation work with one twin aging faster?
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Energy and Particles are changeable - (reversible) !!!
Next: Why relativity and other theories do not work in small scale?
From: G. L. Bradford on 10 Aug 2010 04:53 "RichD" <r_delaney2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:776d0298-22de-4a43-84d7-8c75b1d16823(a)k17g2000prf.googlegroups.com... 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 ===================== You specified "spacetime." So, in what is the "observable universe"? And please don't be so thoughtless as to say, "the 'observable universe' is out there." It's not "out there." That is the unobserved universe out there. The unobservable universe forward (all the way to very, very, far forward) of the "observable universe" in space and time. So relative to the "observable universe" (and thus relative to every "observed, or observable, traveler") the unobservable universe exists faster than the speed of light, existing forward as it does in space and time of the observable; the speed of light 'c' then being the slowest of all possible speeds. (c = (+)300,000kps) (c = (-)300,000kps) Some physicists simply cannot even begin to picture an unobserved traveler, and thus an unobserved clock, racing far out ahead (in the space and time of an unobserved universe) of the slower traveler, and slower clock, they are observing in the slower "observable universe." An unobserved clock far advanced in time over the clock observed. An unobserved traveler far older, far more advanced in time, than the traveler observed. An unobserved universe "out there" far faster, thus far more advanced in both space and time, thus far more advanced in state, than the slower universe (so far behind it in space and time and state) observed from in here (from inside the cave). A traveler, a clock, a universe, having to be put forth as existing faster than the speed of light....relative to slow-witted observers and their even slower "observable universe," that is. (*)(o)(-): observed traveler (o) ((*)) in observable universe (-) ((*)) (u)(0): unobserved traveler (u) in unobservable universe (+) (rel to (-)) cc=(0) Obs(0)|Trav(0) (0=0) O(0)(*).(o)(-)>.(u)(+)(0)> O(0)(*)..(o)(-)>..(u)(+)(0)> O(0)(*)....(o)(-)>....(u)(+)(0)> O(0)(*)........(o)(-)>........(u)(+)(0)> O(0)(*)................(o)(-)>................(u)(+)(0)> <><><><><><><><><><><><><><> O(0)(*)................<(o)(-)................<(0)(u)(+) O(0)(*)........<(o)(-)........<(0)(u)(+) O(0)(*)....<(o)(-)....<(0)(u)(+) O(0)(*)..<(o)(-)..<(0)(u)(+) O(0)(*).<(o)(-).<(0)(u)(+) Obs(0)|Trav(0) (0=0) GLB =====================
From: Daryl McCullough on 10 Aug 2010 08:17 Gc says... > >On 9 elo, 22:13, RichD <r_delaney2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> On Aug 8, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >> > > If you watched a clock that you are passing at high speed; if =A0you = >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 =A0effect" 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? > >I guess in inertial coordinates, which are always cartesian, you see >the curvature of the path, thus you the motion is not inertial. The >straight lines are only in straight in curved space. For example a >satellite on a round orbit goes a straigh all the time in the curved >space. But in inertial coordinates you see a curved path. There is a subtle distinction between curvature and topology. If you take a sheet of paper, and connect one edge to the opposite edge, you get a cylinder. An ant traveling on the surface of the sheet won't notice any curvature, but it will notice that going far enough in one direction will return it to where it started. It is certainly possible that our universe is cylindrical in one direction. Special Relativity would still apply locally, although globally there are differences between some directions and others. -- Daryl McCullough Ithaca, NY
From: Gc on 10 Aug 2010 08:53 On 10 elo, 15:17, stevendaryl3...(a)yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote: > Gc says... > > > > > > >On 9 elo, 22:13, RichD <r_delaney2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Aug 8, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > If you watched a clock that you are passing at high speed; if =A0you = > >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 =A0effect" 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? > > >I guess in inertial coordinates, which are always cartesian, you see > >the curvature of the path, thus you the motion is not inertial. The > >straight lines are only in straight in curved space. For example a > >satellite on a round orbit goes a straigh all the time in the curved > >space. But in inertial coordinates you see a curved path. > > There is a subtle distinction between curvature and topology. > If you take a sheet of paper, and connect one edge to the opposite > edge, you get a cylinder. An ant traveling on the surface of the > sheet won't notice any curvature, but it will notice that going > far enough in one direction will return it to where it started. I promised not to post for a while, but I don`t get what you are saying. Of course, the ant could notice curvature, isn`t that the point when we say that a curvature is an instrinsic property. > It is certainly possible that our universe is cylindrical in > one direction. Special Relativity would still apply locally, > although globally there are differences between some directions > and others. > > -- > Daryl McCullough > Ithaca, NY
From: Gc on 10 Aug 2010 09:05 On 10 elo, 15:17, stevendaryl3...(a)yahoo.com (Daryl McCullough) wrote: > Gc says... > > > > > > >On 9 elo, 22:13, RichD <r_delaney2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On Aug 8, Gc <gcut...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > If you watched a clock that you are passing at high speed; if =A0you = > >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 =A0effect" 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? > > >I guess in inertial coordinates, which are always cartesian, you see > >the curvature of the path, thus you the motion is not inertial. The > >straight lines are only in straight in curved space. For example a > >satellite on a round orbit goes a straigh all the time in the curved > >space. But in inertial coordinates you see a curved path. > > There is a subtle distinction between curvature and topology. > If you take a sheet of paper, and connect one edge to the opposite > edge, you get a cylinder. An ant traveling on the surface of the > sheet won't notice any curvature, but it will notice that going > far enough in one direction will return it to where it started. What if the ant draws a really big triangle on the paper (with respect to ant`s size) and measures the sum of it`s angles?
From: Sam Wormley on 10 Aug 2010 09:32
On 8/10/10 7:52 AM, kenseto wrote: > There is no such thing as absolute time dilation. From the cosmic muon > point of view the lab muon has a life time of 2.2us/gamma. Wrong--From the perspective of any muon, its mean lifetime is 2.2 �s. Seto FAILS to understand relativity. |