Closed Universe Twins Paradox: No Acceleration?

infinitus
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If the universe was closed and such that if one continued in a straight line they would arrive where they began eventually. Wouldn't the twins paradox still be a paradox as neither party is accelerating (are they?) and this would prove that such a universe doesn't exist?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
hmmmmm time dilation, well who is to say that the universe is finite in the first place. considering that we know it is currently expanding(because the gallixys are moving apart) its not to hard to fathom the fact that it may be infinitely big in porportion and that it is getting biger even as we speak.
 
As long as it isn't expanding faster then the traveller they will still met again if the universe is as suggested in my original post.
 
infinitus said:
As long as it isn't expanding faster then the traveller they will still met again if the universe is as suggested in my original post.
But if the universe is infinite the odds of a duplicate of your traveler existing is 1 , so you argument is not unique to a closed as the same result can be expected in an infinite universe.

I do not see how the "twin paradox" enters into this. Proper application of Special Relativity resolves the "twin paradox", so it is not a paradox.
 
infinitus said:
If the universe was closed ... wouldn't the twins paradox still be a paradox ... and this would prove that such a universe doesn't exist?
The paper, "On the Twin Paradox in a Universe with a Compact Dimension" presents a very clear answer to your question:

"We consider the twin paradox of special relativity in a universe with a compact spatial dimension. Such topology allows two twin observers to remain inertial yet meet periodically. The paradox is resolved by considering the relationship of each twin to a preferred inertial reference frame which exists in such a universe because global Lorentz invariance is broken. The twins can perform 'global' experiments to determine their velocities with respect to the preferred reference frame (by sending light signals around the cylinder, for instance)."
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0503/0503070.pdf

See these references also:

http://physics.ucr.edu/Active/Abs/abstract-13-NOV-97.html
http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=79
http://cornell.mirror.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v8/i6/p1662_1
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0101/0101014.pdf
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0006/0006039.pdf
http://www.everythingimportant.org/viewtopic.php?t=605
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm

All this analysis has a pointed answer:

When the two twins meet again, the youngest, least-aged twin will be the one who is moving the fastest with respect to the absolute frame of reference.

Here's the main point:

Spatially compact spacetimes break global Lorentz invariance and define absolute inertial frames of reference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top