My Sad Paradox: Watching 30 Years in 3?

[(T.O.E)]

this is my 1st post, and its a question that i had developed, most likely out of ignorance, so please save me from my sad paradox. lol
Thank you, in advanced.

I understand if i where floating in the bulk of space with no visual queues to give me aid in telling me if I were moving, i could simply say I am stationary but just as easily be in constant motion.

And if say, you are also out in space facing me and we are about to pass each other, I could say I am stationary and you are passing me, and well you have equal grounds of saying. I am passing you.

Now say we pass at 95% the speed of light. I appear, to you, to be going 667 million miles per hour, but to me, you appear to be moving toward me at that speed.

And here is paradox number 1, the one i understand.
We both see each other in slow motion. All my gestures appear slower then yours, but i see all your gestures are slower then mine.
I see your slower then me, and You see I am slower then you.now this is my sad paradox.
say you and your brother are physicists, and you both decide to do an experiment. You are going to get into a ship and without acceleration travel at 95% the speed of light, away from earth, and you will bring a magical telescope and as you stay at your constant speed you will observe your brother.

Your brother with his magical Telescope will watch you, observing you.

now, you launch instantly and can now say Earth is leave you at 95% the speed of light,
and your brother can now say u are leaving Earth at 95% the speed of light.. we find are selves back at relative Constant Motion

you travel 3 years, YOUR 3 years not your brothers. in your 3 years its been 30 for your bro.
your brother had watched you for 30 years.
you watch your brother for 3.

this is the mind meld.

how can your brother move slower then you, and still have watched longer?
this leaves you watching your brother's slow motion 30 years, in only 3 years.
were logically if you watched 30 years in slow motion, it will most definitely take longer then 30 year to watch it in its entirety

the only way for you to watch 30 years within 3 years is if the 30 years where in fast motion.

but according to constant motion(not accelerating), there is no fast motion at play.

would u miss 27 years in your instant acceleration?

 

[Dale]

See the http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html" FAQ.

 

[Entropia]

This is a fascinating paradox and it raises some interesting questions about the concept of time and how it is perceived. From what I understand, the key issue here is the difference in time dilation between the two observers. As you mentioned, when traveling at high speeds, time appears to slow down for the observer. So in your scenario, while you are traveling at 95% the speed of light, only 3 years pass for you but 30 years pass for your brother on Earth.

The paradox arises when we consider the fact that your brother has been observing you for 30 years, while you have only been observing him for 3 years. This seems to contradict the idea that time is moving slower for you. However, this is where the concept of relativity comes into play. Each observer experiences time differently based on their relative speed and position. So from your brother's perspective, you are the one moving slower, which is why he has been observing you for 30 years while you have only been observing him for 3 years.

To answer your question about whether you would miss 27 years during your instant acceleration, the answer is no. Time dilation does not occur during instantaneous acceleration, only during constant motion. So while you may appear to be moving at a fast speed from your brother's perspective, for you it would be an instantaneous acceleration and no time would have passed.

In conclusion, this paradox highlights the complex nature of time and how it is perceived by different observers. It also emphasizes the importance of understanding relativity in order to fully grasp these concepts. I hope this helps to alleviate your sad paradox and I encourage you to continue exploring and questioning these fascinating ideas.