Twin Paradox Explained: Long Outbound & Short Inbound Leg

In summary: Is my understanding of the paradox is right? If no then please give me some detail.In summary, the article explains the Twin Paradox, which is a thought experiment that explores the effects of time dilation and asymmetry in special relativity. It discusses how an observer who is moving at a constant speed relative to another observer will experience time at a different rate. The article also explains how this phenomenon can lead to one observer aging less than the other, even without acceleration. It uses the example of two twins, Stella and Terence, and their different perceptions of time during a space journey. Stella, who is moving at a constant speed, experiences time at a slower rate compared to Terence, who is stationary. This asymmetry is caused
  • #1
mananvpanchal
215
0
Hello, All

I read the article:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html
But, I cannot understand how just asymmetry (without acceleration) can cause less age of moving observer.

The article says:

All well and good, but this discussion at first just seems to sharpen the paradox! Stella sees what Terence sees: a slow clock on the Outbound Leg, a fast clock on the Inbound Leg. Whence comes the asymmetry between Stella and Terence?

Answer: in the duration of the Inbound and Outbound Legs, as seen. For Stella, each Leg takes about a year. Terence maintains that Stella's turnaround takes place at year 7 at a distance of nearly 7 light-years, so he won't see it until nearly year 14. Terence sees an Outbound Leg of long duration, and an Inbound Leg of very short duration.

I cannot understand why do Terence see an Outbound Leg of long duration and an Inbound Leg of very short duration?

Please, explain me this. But, no maths please.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
mananvpanchal said:
Hello, All

I read the article:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html
But, I cannot understand how just asymmetry (without acceleration) can cause less age of moving observer.

The article says:



I cannot understand why do Terence see an Outbound Leg of long duration and an Inbound Leg of very short duration?

Please, explain me this. But, no maths please.

Because if Stella turns around at 7 light years, it takes 7 years for the light from this turnaround to reach Terrence. Thus, for 14 years, Terence sees Stella's clock run slow.
 
  • #3
Thanks PAllen.

But, I need some detail to understand it. So I am going to describe what is my understanding about the paradox.

A is stationary and B is moving with constant speed.
There is no acceleration involved (Just assume because we trying to solve it only with asymmetry).
(The x and t is in A's reference frame)
Suppose A at (x=0, t=0) and B (x=0, t=0).
A flashes a beam each per second. A knows the speed of B. So A can calculate at which (x=?, t=?) beam will meet to B.
At t=1 A at (x=0, t=1) and B at (x=1, t=1).
At t=1 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=a, t=b). where a > 1, b > 1.
At t=2 A at (x=0, t=2) and B at (x=2, t=2).
At t=2 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=c, t=d). where c > 2, d > 2 ,(c-2) > (a-1), (d-2) > (b-1).
As time elapse, B sees A's clock slowing down more. Because B gets beam more late.
(The frequency of receiving beam increases until B is in motion relative to A. Whenever B stops it receives quick signals for some time because of signals coming behind it. But after some time B starts receiving signals in time which is flashed after stopping B.)

In inward journey
At t=10 A at (x=0, t=10) and B at (x=10, t=10).
At t=10 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=p, t=q). where p < 10, q > 10.
At t=11 A at (x=0, t=11) and B at (x=9, t=11).
At t=11 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=r, t=s). where r < 9, s > 11, (r-9) < (p-10), (s-11) < (q-10).
So, as time elapsed, B sees A's clock running more fast. Because B gets beam more quickly.
(If B doesn't stay motionless for some time described in above round braces, then B get much more signals in starting phase of returning journey which is flashed before returning of B. when B starts receiving signals flashed after returning, we can describe above scenario)

Is my understanding of the paradox is right? If no then please give me some detail.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
mananvpanchal said:
Thanks PAllen.

But, I need some detail to understand it. So I am going to describe what is my understanding about the paradox.

A is stationary and B is moving with constant speed.
There is no acceleration involved (Just assume because we trying to solve it only with asymmetry).
(The x and t is in A's reference frame)
Suppose A at (x=0, t=0) and B (x=0, t=0).
A flashes a beam each per second. A knows the speed of B. So A can calculate at which (x=?, t=?) beam will meet to B.
At t=1 A at (x=0, t=1) and B at (x=1, t=1).
At t=1 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=a, t=b). where a > 1, b > 1.
At t=2 A at (x=0, t=2) and B at (x=2, t=2).
At t=2 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=c, t=d). where c > 2, d > 2 ,(c-2) > (a-1), (d-2) > (b-1).
As time elapse, B sees A's clock slowing down more. Because B gets beam more late.
(The frequency of receiving beam increases until B is in motion relative to A. Whenever B stops it receives quick signals for some time because of signals coming behind it. But after some time B starts receiving signals in time which is flashed after stopping B.)

In inward journey
At t=10 A at (x=0, t=10) and B at (x=10, t=10).
At t=10 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=p, t=q). where p < 10, q > 10.
At t=11 A at (x=0, t=11) and B at (x=9, t=11).
At t=11 A calculate that beam and B will meet at (x=r, t=s). where r < 9, s > 11, (r-9) < (p-10), (s-11) < (q-10).
So, as time elapsed, B sees A's clock running more fast. Because B gets beam more quickly.
(If B doesn't stay motionless for some time described in above round braces, then B get much more signals in starting phase of returning journey which is flashed before returning of B. when B starts receiving signals flashed after returning, we can describe above scenario)

Is my understanding of the paradox is right? If no then please give me some detail.
It looks like you are saying that B is traveling at the speed of light but I don't think you are so I don't understand what you are trying to communicate in the bolded values.
 
  • #6
mananvpanchal said:
Thanks PAllen.

But, I need some detail to understand it. So I am going to describe what is my understanding about the paradox.

outbound:

As time elapse, B sees A's clock slowing down more. Because B gets beam more late.

In inward journey

So, as time elapsed, B sees A's clock running more fast.

This is not correct. B knows how far away A is and knows that A is moving away or towards B, so B will have to take into account the speed of light and the fact that A is moving before he calculates how fast or slow A's clock is ticking.

After he does this, B will see A's clock ticking more slowly as he is moving away from A, AND as he is moving towards A.
 
  • #7
I am very sorry.

I don't need to consider this.
where c > 2, d > 2 ,(c-2) > (a-1), (d-2) > (b-1).
where r < 9, s > 11, (r-9) < (p-10), (s-11) < (q-10)

So, my conclusion
(The frequency of receiving beam increases until B is in motion relative to A. Whenever B stops it receives quick signals for some time because of signals coming behind it. But after some time B starts receiving signals in time which is flashed after stopping B.)
is wrong.

I need to consider this. a=(c-a) and b=(d-b).
And from this B receives signals at same frequency in outward journey.

@PAllen

The first diagram shows doppler shift analysis. But, there is same length of time axis for both, then why stella can send only 16 signals while terence can 32?

The sedond diagram shows lines of simultaneity.
As I understand from the 6th diagram of the link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativity_of_simultaneity
that the diagram shows lines of simultaneos events according to stella in FoR of terence.
The same diagram we can draw for simultaneos events for terence in FoR of stella. what is the asymmetry?

@ghwellsjr

No, x is just a unit of length. I am just trying to say that at t=1 B should be at x=1.

@Rap

sorry, I cannot get you.
 
  • #8
mananvpanchal said:
@ghwellsjr

No, x is just a unit of length. I am just trying to say that at t=1 B should be at x=1.
Is the unit of time one second? In other words, are all the integer values of t when a new flash is emitted?

Are you trying to solve this problem in a general sense, that is, for all values of speed?
 
  • #9
mananvpanchal said:
@PAllen

The first diagram shows doppler shift analysis. But, there is same length of time axis for both, then why stella can send only 16 signals while terence can 32?

The sedond diagram shows lines of simultaneity.

Ignore the second diagram. You originally asked about the Doppler explanation. Let's focus on that because it is the most physical explanation.

I seem to be repeating myself. Can you try to explicitly say what you don't understand about the following:

Stella and Terence each send out one pulse per second. Each pulse is an expanding spherical wave front. While they are moving away from each other (thus each one's pulse has to 'catch up' to the other), each receives (for example) one pulse every two seconds.

As soon as Stella turns around, Stella starts 'running into' Terence's already emitted pulses faster. So now Stella is getting (for example) two pulses per second. So, let's say, Stella experiences 10 seconds before turnaround and 10 seconds after turnaround. Then Stella receives 5 pulses on her outward leg and 20 pulses on her inward leg. So she concludes Terence ages 25 seconds while she aged 20 seconds.

However, when Stella turns around, Terence has not received many of the pulses from Stella's outward leg. Terence will continue to receive one pulse every two seconds for 20 of Terrence's seconds - that is, until receiving all of the 10 pulses Stella sent on her outward leg. Then, for 5 of Terrence's seconds, Terrence will receive two pulses per second from Stella - getting the 10 from Stella's inward leg. Thus Terrence will get 20 pulses from Stella in 25 of Terrence's seconds. Again, they both agree that Stella aged 20 seconds to Terrence's 25.
 
  • #10
Ok,

So, stella experience 20 second in whole journey, 10 second in outward leg, and 10 second in inward leg.
Stella receives 5 pulse in outward (1 per 2 sec) and 20 in inward (2 per 1 sec). So she concludes terence age as 25.
And terence receives 20 pulse which stella has sent, so stella's age is 20.

Actually we guess stella's age and conclude terence's age, if we guess terence's age and try to get stella's age then what?

Suppose, we guess terence experience 25 second during whole journey.

Stella gets total 25 pulse in 20 second, where terence gets 20 pulse in 25 second.

Now, stella gets 5 pulse in 10 second in outward leg. (0.5 per sec)
and terence gets x pulse in t second in outward leg. (x/t=r(out) per sec)

Now stella gets 20 pulse in 10 second in inward leg. (2 per sec)
and terence gets 20-x pulse in 25-t second in inward leg. ((20-x)/(25-t)=r(in) per sec)

(where x can be 2 to 19, and t can be 2 to 24)

So, for any values of x and t there is r(out) != 0.5 and r(in) != 2.
But, it should be. because at least if we consider only outward or inward both traveling related to each other (without considering frame change).

How can we explain the different rate?

Different rate is the result of guessing different time elapsed.
But, that is the thing which to be proved, not to be guessed.

I am very sorry but I cannot understand from where terence gets 25 second while stella gets only 20.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
mananvpanchal said:
...
But, I cannot understand how just asymmetry (without acceleration) can cause less age of moving observer.
...
I cannot understand why do Terence see an Outbound Leg of long duration and an Inbound Leg of very short duration?

Please, explain me this. But, no maths please.
Do you understand and agree that if Stella never turned around then they would each see the other ones clock ticking at 1/2 the rate of their own?

Do you also understand and agree that if Stella started out far away from Terrence and was approaching Terrence, they would each see the other ones clock ticking at 2 times the rate of their own?

These are both symmetrical situations and so they both must see the same thing in the other one, correct? Do you agree with these statements?
 
  • #12
ghwellsjr said:
Do you understand and agree that if Stella never turned around then they would each see the other ones clock ticking at 1/2 the rate of their own?

Do you also understand and agree that if Stella started out far away from Terrence and was approaching Terrence, they would each see the other ones clock ticking at 2 times the rate of their own?

These are both symmetrical situations and so they both must see the same thing in the other one, correct? Do you agree with these statements?

Yes, I am agree.
 
  • #13
Good.

Now while Stella and Terrence have a great distance between them, does it make sense to you that if something happened to one of them, the other one wouldn't see it until some time later because it would take time for the image of the change to propagate across that great distance?
 
  • #14
ghwellsjr said:
Good.

Now while Stella and Terrence have a great distance between them, does it make sense to you that if something happened to one of them, the other one wouldn't see it until some time later because it would take time for the image of the change to propagate across that great distance?

Yes.
 
  • #15
Fine.

Now does it make sense to you that while Stella and Terrence have a great distance between them, if one of them changes their speed and/or their direction toward or away from the other one, that first one will instantly see a change in the tick rate of the other ones clock?
 
  • #16
ghwellsjr said:
Fine.

Now does it make sense to you that while Stella and Terrence have a great distance between them, if one of them changes their speed and/or their direction toward or away from the other one, that first one will instantly see a change in the tick rate of the other ones clock?

I am sorry, but this seems that our discussion is accelerated too fast in last post. :smile:

Ok, I am describing again what I understand:

1. In outward leg stella receives 5 pulse in 10 second, as per stella terence's age is 5 second.

2. In outward leg terence receives 5 pulse in 10 second, as per terence stella's age is 5 second.

3. In inward leg stella receives 20 pulse in 10 second, so stella say terences's age is 25.

4. But, after turn around terence continue receives 5 pulse in 10 second which is sent by stella during outward leg. And this is the thing which cause age difference.

5. After finishing that 5 pulse terence also starts receiving pulse at rate of 2 pulse/second, and he gets 10 in 5 second. So he concludes her age as 20.

But, my concern is other one.

The above one is says that terence is stationary and stella is moving.

So pulse sent by moving body or stationary body from a single point to terence always reach at same time because moving body cannot affect light speed.

Problem is "first some time in inward leg", during that terence receives at same rate stella at different. Terence cannot know quickly about turn around because he receive pulse at same rate. while stella has quick knowledge that terence is comming toward her, and she starts receiving pulse quickly!

Actully, if we imagine that stella has power to measure one way speed of pulse in inward leg which is fired in outward leg. she will measure the speed < c. because that pulse is reaching to terence as same rate (We can imagine this).

But, if terence has power to measure one way speed of pulse he sent during whole journey, he concludes the speed = c.

The situation seems asymmetrical only when we accept that stella measure one way speed of pulse < c in inward leg fired in outward leg.

Light has constant velocity relative to everything, then who determines that stella is coming near so she can receive quickly, and terence is stationary, so he should receive as per same rate (point 4)?

My point is if there are only the two in universe, and stella doesn't know that she is actually moving. She thinks that terence is moving. And if both meets stella is less aged than terence, then who has determined that stella was moving and stella had chaged her frame?
 
  • #17
mananvpanchal said:
I am sorry, but this seems that our discussion is accelerated too fast in last post. :smile:

Ok, I am describing again what I understand:

1. In outward leg stella receives 5 pulse in 10 second, as per stella terence's age is 5 second.

2. In outward leg terence receives 5 pulse in 10 second, as per terence stella's age is 5 second.

3. In inward leg stella receives 20 pulse in 10 second, so stella say terences's age is 25.

4. But, after turn around terence continue receives 5 pulse in 10 second which is sent by stella during outward leg. And this is the thing which cause age difference.

5. After finishing that 5 pulse terence also starts receiving pulse at rate of 2 pulse/second, and he gets 10 in 5 second. So he concludes her age as 20.
You've explained this perfectly.
mananvpanchal said:
But, my concern is other one.

The above one is says that terence is stationary and stella is moving.
The Relativistic Doppler analysis, which you just did, is not concerned with who is stationary or who is moving. The non-relativistic Doppler Effect is concerned with who is stationary and who is moving because it depends on each observer's motion through the medium. Not so with Relativistic Doppler. It doesn't say anything about a Frame of Reference or any particular theory or anything about the one-way speed of light. It doesn't offer any explanation for why the effect is happening but merely describes what each observer sees with their own eyes. Now of course, Special Relativity can help us figure out what each observer sees, but it is not defining what each observer sees.
mananvpanchal said:
So pulse sent by moving body or stationary body from a single point to terence always reach at same time because moving body cannot affect light speed.

Problem is "first some time in inward leg", during that terence receives at same rate stella at different. Terence cannot know quickly about turn around because he receive pulse at same rate. while stella has quick knowledge that terence is comming toward her, and she starts receiving pulse quickly!
That's correct.
mananvpanchal said:
Actully, if we imagine that stella has power to measure one way speed of pulse in inward leg which is fired in outward leg. she will measure the speed < c. because that pulse is reaching to terence as same rate (We can imagine this).

But, if terence has power to measure one way speed of pulse he sent during whole journey, he concludes the speed = c.
Even if they had special knowledge of how light propagates, it wouldn't change what they actually see, would it? Of course not. This has no bearing on the Relativistic Doppler analysis that you just did.
mananvpanchal said:
The situation seems asymmetrical only when we accept that stella measure one way speed of pulse < c in inward leg fired in outward leg.
No, the situation is actually asymmetrical because Stella immediately sees a change in Terrence's tick rate coinciding with her turn around and Terrence doesn't have that experience. When he sees a change in Stella's tick rate, it is not related to anything he did.
mananvpanchal said:
Light has constant velocity relative to everything, then who determines that stella is coming near so she can receive quickly, and terence is stationary, so he should receive as per same rate (point 4)?
Stella determined that she is coming near to Terrance when she turned around and started coming near to him. Terrence didn't do that.
mananvpanchal said:
My point is if there are only the two in universe, and stella doesn't know that she is actually moving. She thinks that terence is moving. And if both meets stella is less aged than terence, then who has determined that stella was moving and stella had chaged her frame?
As I said, the Relativistic Doppler is not related to any establishment of any frame, that is, it doesn't happen because of Einstein's particular definition of a Frame of Reference or Einstein's postulate that the one-way speed of light is c for any inertial observer. It works the same way under Lorentz Ether Theory in which the one-way speed of light is a constant only in an absolute fixed "ether" frame.

But if you are going to incorporate Special Relativity to help understand the Twin Paradox using Relativistic Doppler, you must use a single Frame of Reference, anyone you choose. You can't have Stella "changing her frame". Both Stella and Terrence should be discussed in terms of the same frame. It can be one in which Terrence is always stationary, or it can be one in which Stella is stationary for no more than half the time, but there is no inertial frame in which Stella is stationary for the entire trip.

Please note that the questions I asked you in the preceding posts were not related to any particular frame, nor were they concerned with who was moving and who was stationary. I specifically worded my questions to you in the context of symmetry.
 
  • #18
The Relativistic Doppler analysis, which you just did, is not concerned with who is stationary or who is moving. The non-relativistic Doppler Effect is concerned with who is stationary and who is moving because it depends on each observer's motion through the medium

Ok, I am agree with this. No one can claim that I am moving with relativistic doppler analysis.

Even if they had special knowledge of how light propagates, it wouldn't change what they actually see, would it? Of course not. This has no bearing on the Relativistic Doppler analysis that you just did.

Sorry, but I am not understanding this.
Suppose, during inward leg, from stella's FoR, terence is moving, and stella measures one way speed of light as c, then terence should get light pulse quickly, because terence is moving towards stella and stella measures one way speed as c.

If we think that stella measures one ways speed of light < c, then only terence doesn't receive pulse quickly.

From terence's FoR, he always measures c and stella receives pulse quickly. this is ideal situation.

Both fires 10 pulse during outward leg, but after turn around stella receives quickly and terence not. Both have to receive remaining 5 pulse. Both is moving relative to each other.
Then why only stella receives quickly and terence not.

If we say that stella measures speed < c, then only we can say that stella is moving and stella has changed her frame.

If we say that stella always measure speed as c, then how can we determine that who is moving, and if we cannot determine that who is moving then how can we determine who is less aged. And yet, one of both is less aged then who has determine that "actually" who was moving?

We say that motion is relative and speed of light is c relative to everything, then how can we determine that stella is moving and stella has changed her frame?

No, the situation is actually asymmetrical because Stella immediately sees a change in Terrence's tick rate coinciding with her turn around and Terrence doesn't have that experience. When he sees a change in Stella's tick rate, it is not related to anything he did.

That is the question, why stella sees immediate change while terence not?
This is also the question that how terence know that he didn't to anything, where how stella know that she had changed her frame?

If this seems silly discussion and I am not understanding well then please excuse me.

Thanks
 
  • #19
mananvpanchal said:
ghwellsjr said:
The Relativistic Doppler analysis, which you just did, is not concerned with who is stationary or who is moving. The non-relativistic Doppler Effect is concerned with who is stationary and who is moving because it depends on each observer's motion through the medium.
Ok, I am agree with this. No one can claim that I am moving with relativistic doppler analysis.
ghwellsjr said:
Even if they had special knowledge of how light propagates, it wouldn't change what they actually see, would it? Of course not. This has no bearing on the Relativistic Doppler analysis that you just did.
Sorry, but I am not understanding this.
I always thought when someone agreed with something, that meant they understood it.
mananvpanchal said:
Suppose, during inward leg, from stella's FoR, terence is moving, and stella measures one way speed of light as c, then terence should get light pulse quickly, because terence is moving towards stella and stella measures one way speed as c.

If we think that stella measures one ways speed of light < c, then only terence doesn't receive pulse quickly.

From terence's FoR, he always measures c and stella receives pulse quickly. this is ideal situation.

Both fires 10 pulse during outward leg, but after turn around stella receives quickly and terence not. Both have to receive remaining 5 pulse. Both is moving relative to each other.
Then why only stella receives quickly and terence not.

If we say that stella measures speed < c, then only we can say that stella is moving and stella has changed her frame.

If we say that stella always measure speed as c, then how can we determine that who is moving, and if we cannot determine that who is moving then how can we determine who is less aged. And yet, one of both is less aged then who has determine that "actually" who was moving?

We say that motion is relative and speed of light is c relative to everything, then how can we determine that stella is moving and stella has changed her frame?
Six times I have counted where you said Stella or Terrence measured the one-way speed of light. But that's the problem. We cannot measure or know the propagation of light. If we could know it, then we would have the answer to your question, how can we determine who is moving and who is not?

But that is where theory comes in. Prior to Einstein, everyone assumed that light propagated at c only in the ether rest state. But Einstein said you could assume something different--you could assume that light propagates at c in any rest frame. But you have taken that one step further and assumed that when Stella changes direction, the one-way speed of light changes with her motion. That's not what Einstein said. He said you could assume that the one-way speed of light is c in Stella's rest state prior to her turn-around (in which case, Terrence would be moving away from her prior to her turn-around and then she moves towards him at an even faster rate) OR you could assume that the one-way speed of light is c in Stella's rest state after her turn-around (in which case, Terrence would be moving toward her after her turn-around but she would be moving away from him at an even faster rate prior to her turn-around) OR you could assume that the one-way speed of light is c in Terrence's rest frame (in which case, Stella first moves away from and then towards him) OR you could assume any other rest state in which neither Stella nor Terrence are ever at rest.

Under any assumption of the state in which the one-way speed of light is c, you can analyze the motion of both Stella and Terrence and arrive at the same conclusion that matches what the Relative Doppler analysis indicates. But the easiest state to analyze the situation is the one in which Terrence remains stationary. If you choose that Frame of Reference, you can transform the entire scenario into one of the other frames and you will see that you get the same result.
mananvpanchal said:
ghwellsjr said:
No, the situation is actually asymmetrical because Stella immediately sees a change in Terrence's tick rate coinciding with her turn around and Terrence doesn't have that experience. When he sees a change in Stella's tick rate, it is not related to anything he did.
That is the question, why stella sees immediate change while terence not?
This is also the question that how terence know that he didn't to anything, where how stella know that she had changed her frame?

If this seems silly discussion and I am not understanding well then please excuse me.

Thanks
If Terrence doesn't get out of bed in the morning but Stella does, don't you think they each know which one got out of bed?
 
  • #20
mananvpanchal said:
[..] My point is if there are only the two in universe, and stella doesn't know that she is actually moving. She thinks that terence is moving. And if both meets stella is less aged than terence, then who has determined that stella was moving and stella had chaged her frame?
Their clocks will tell us who moved around most, and the Doppler effect will allow to follow it more precisely. But SR doesn't really answer the question about an empty universe, as it is based on the same "special" or "preferred" group of reference systems as used in classical mechanics*. Relativistic Doppler relates to - and is only valid for - such a reference system. We can't know for sure (at least that theory doesn't have the answer) if there still would be such reference systems in an empty universe; with the original definition (relating to the stars) they would even be undefined.

*I assume that that is what you refer to with "changed her frame"; however we can choose if we want to change our reference system, just as we can choose if we want to change the hour on our watch.
 
  • #21
@ghwellsjr,

I am going to restate this, if wrong then please correct me.

He said you could assume that the one-way speed of light is c in Stella's rest state prior to her turn-around (in which case, Terrence would be moving away from her prior to her turn-around and then she moves towards him at an even faster rate)

Outbound leg, we assume stella at rest. stella measures speed as c, stella sees terence is moving away from her, when stella transforms this into "Inbound frame" stella should see terence is coming toward stella at faster rate.

you could assume that the one-way speed of light is c in Stella's rest state after her turn-around (in which case, Terrence would be moving toward her after her turn-around but she would be moving away from him at an even faster rate prior to her turn-around)

Inbound leg, we assume stella at rest. stella measures speed as c, stella sees terence is moving towards her, when stella transforms this into "Outbound frame" stella should see terence is moving away from her at faster rate.

Is this restated correctly?

If Terrence doesn't get out of bed in the morning but Stella does, don't you think they each know which one got out of bed?

Ok, so, some force needed for changing a frame, but changing a frame is a actual cause of age difference. That is why stella knows that she has changed the frame.

Thanks.

@harrylin

Thanks.
 
  • #22
mananvpanchal said:
[..] changing a frame is a actual cause of age difference. [..]
Not exactly. The change of velocity of one of the them is the cause that the observed symmetry is broken. It is also the cause of the possibility to directly compare their ages.
 
  • #23
You keep thinking and saying that Stella changes frames when she changes direction. You have to get that idea out of your mind or you will not be following Einstein's process.

You also have to understand that Einstein's concept of a frame does not enable observers to see anything beyond what they could see without a frame. We have already discussed what each observer actually sees using Relativistic Doppler and adding frames won't change that or add to it.

You also keep talking about Stella measuring the speed of light as c. But she can only measure the round-trip speed of light which has no bearing on the concept of Einstein's frame. Einstein bases his concept of synchronizing remote clocks by defining the one-way speed of light as c, not measuring the one-way speed of light to be c.

If you want to talk about frames then you need to understand that Einstein's process is to build a frame consisting of a coordinate system of three dimensions of space and one dimension of time. This allows you to specify the locations as a function of time for each observer in your scenario. Remember--one frame for all observers from start to finish. This does not involve any transforms.

After you analyze every thing that you are interested in using that one frame, you can then, if you want, transform all the significant events from that first frame into another frame moving with respect to the first frame and see how the same scenario is described with the new set of coordinates. But you won't learn anything new from this transformation process--it will yield the same results as your first analysis as far as what each observer can see. You can repeat this process for as many new frames as you want.

What you should do is start by specifying your entire scenario in a frame in which Terrence is at rest. For example, you could say that Stella and Terrence starts out at time zero at location zero. (We consider just one dimension of space.) Then Stella travels at 60%c for 12.5 seconds which puts her at 7.5 light-seconds from Terrence. Now at time 12.5 she is at location 7.5. Now she turns around and comes back to Terrence at location zero which will take her another 12.5 seconds. So if we specify these events as [time,location], we can describe Stella's history as:

[0,0]
[12.5,7.5]
[25,0]

Terrence's history for the same three time samples is:

[0,0]
[12.5,0]
[25,0]

Now Einstein says that in this frame, we can calculate the amount of time elapsed on each clock by dividing the coordinate time interval by gamma. Gamma at 60%c is 1.25. Therefor, since Stella is always traveling at 60%c, her clock will advance by 25/1.25=20 seconds. Since Terrence is stationary in this frame, his clock will advance the same as the coordinate clocks which is 25 seconds. If you want to also calculate what each observer sees, that will be a little more work. Can you figure out how to do that?

Now if you want, you can transform the six events listed above into another frame. Do you know how to do that?
 
  • #24
Thanks to all guys. I got it.
what my doubt was that change in frame is a relative event. But that is not true. Change in frame is absolute event.

Thanks again to all.
 
  • #25
Just sharing some lovely event with my almost 5 year old son an hour ago:

>Do you know that if you go in a fast rocket your clock is going slower than our clock?
>Really?
>Yes! Hey, if you go in a rocket for some time you are going to be younger than your brother (brother is 16 months old )
>Wow, great I am going to have a big brother! Can I go daddy?
 

1. What is the Twin Paradox?

The Twin Paradox is a thought experiment in which one twin travels at high speeds in space while the other remains on Earth. When the traveling twin returns, they will have aged less than their sibling, leading to a paradox since they are both the same age.

2. How is the Twin Paradox explained?

The Twin Paradox is explained using the theory of relativity. According to this theory, time is relative and can be affected by factors such as speed and gravity. In the case of the twins, the traveling twin experiences time dilation due to their high speeds, causing them to age slower.

3. What is the significance of the long outbound and short inbound legs in the Twin Paradox?

The long outbound leg and short inbound leg represent the different factors that affect time dilation in the Twin Paradox. The outbound leg involves the traveling twin moving at high speeds, causing time dilation. The inbound leg involves the traveling twin returning to Earth and experiencing less time due to their slower speed.

4. Is the Twin Paradox a real phenomenon?

Although the Twin Paradox is a thought experiment, it has been confirmed through experiments and observations in space. For example, astronauts who have traveled at high speeds in space have returned to Earth slightly younger than their peers who remained on Earth.

5. Can the Twin Paradox be applied to other scenarios?

Yes, the principles behind the Twin Paradox can be applied to other scenarios involving time dilation, such as the famous "Twin Astronaut" experiment where one twin stays on Earth while the other travels in a spaceship around the world. It can also be applied to scenarios involving objects moving at high speeds or in strong gravitational fields.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
27
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
33
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
67
Views
5K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
4
Views
2K
Back
Top