Is the Langevin Twins Paradox Validated by Other Experiments?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the Langevin Twins Paradox and its validation through various experiments, particularly in relation to the Hafele-Keating experiment and the implications of relativity. Participants explore the nature of the paradox, the validity of time dilation, and the physical mechanisms behind time differences observed in experiments.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the paradox was verified by the Hafele-Keating experiment in 1971, while others question the reliability of that data and seek later experiments that may have confirmed the findings.
  • Several participants argue that the situation is not a paradox but a well-established consequence of relativity, with GPS satellites providing further verification of relativistic effects.
  • There is a general agreement that time dilation is valid, but participants express differing views on the explanations for the observed effects and the physical mechanisms behind them.
  • Some participants highlight that explanations for time dilation can be mutually inconsistent, and there is no consensus on the physical mechanism that causes the time differences observed in experiments.
  • Discussions include analogies comparing clocks to measuring devices, with some participants questioning how clocks "know" how to run at different rates when in motion relative to one another.
  • One participant emphasizes the distinction between clocks and measuring tapes, arguing that clocks record time in a way that is fundamentally different from how measuring devices record length.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that there is no paradox in the Langevin Twins scenario, but there remains significant disagreement regarding the explanations for the observed time dilation and the physical mechanisms involved. The discussion is unresolved with multiple competing views presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the need for a physical mechanism to explain time differences, while others argue that the lack of such an explanation is a flaw in understanding relativity. The discussion reflects various philosophical interpretations of the implications of relativity and time measurement.

  • #31
russ_watters said:
There is a difference between a clock and a tape measure that no one has picked-up on: a clock is a recording device (actually, two separate pieces: a measuring device and a recording device) and a tape measure isn't. Once a clock ticks off a second, that second is gone, never to be seen again. The only thing left is the record of that second, which for a clock is the time output by the display. So the measurements taken by a clock are exactly as permanent as those taken by a person with a clipboard standing over a tape measure. Better yet, one of those newfangled laser tape measures could keep a "permanent" record of length contraction.


no, clocks are a method of measure, they are not time itself. they make the passage of time but if you sping the hands backwords time doesn't reverse itself. clocks are exactly like a tape measure in that they both measure something. besides which, this is all totally besides the point.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Gir said:
no, clocks are a method of measure, they are not time itself.
Um, I didn't say they 'are time'. I did say they are a measuring device. Did you read incorrectly? :confused:
sping the hands backwords time doesn't reverse itself. clocks are exactly like a tape measure in that they both measure something.
Again, that's all I was saying: that they are exactly like tape measures. So what's the problem? :confused:
 
  • #33
Well, I feel it's good to question these things ... question everything. Okay, we have the observation ... we have the mathematical relationships describing it ... so, now let's do search for the mechanism causing it. Time is merely a measurement relative to a frame and something happens to that measurement ... relativity doesn't cause things ... there is a mechanism.
 
  • #34
CeeAnne said:
Well, I feel it's good to question these things ... question everything. Okay, we have the observation ... we have the mathematical relationships describing it ... so, now let's do search for the mechanism causing it. Time is merely a measurement relative to a frame and something happens to that measurement ... relativity doesn't cause things ... there is a mechanism.

The mechanism is the postulate "laws of nature are equal to every inertial observer". If this wouldn't be true the laws of nature would be totally chaotic. From this postulate follows that the value of c has to be constant to every observer, since c defines the value of the interval. If the interval would be different to different observers, the maximum signal speed would also seem like changing, depending on the speed of the observer.

If c wouldn't be constant there could be photons with different velocities, same frequencies but different energies etc. It just wouldn't make sense.

And because c is constant to every inertial observer, time and length can't be absolute.
 
  • #35
Hurkyl - your graphical analysis is appreciated - but I am still left without an answer to the question which concerns me. I will send you a private message since this thread is about to close
 

Similar threads

Insights Learning Twin Paradox for Freely-Falling Observers
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
High School My paraphrased explanation of the Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
Undergrad Twin Paradox Explained: No Math Required
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
High School Twins Paradox Thought Exp: What Happens When Reunited?
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
Undergrad Three inertial particles: Separating the twins from the paradox
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
Graduate Time Dilation, Twin paradox etc.
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Graduate Twin Paradox (thorough explanation needed)
  • · Replies 190 ·
7
Replies
190
Views
27K
Graduate Twin Paradox: Einstein's Explanation and Alternative Interpretations
  • · Replies 219 ·
8
Replies
219
Views
26K
  • Poll Poll
Graduate Does the Earth's Rotation Affect Time Dilation in Einstein's Twin Paradox?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Graduate Resolving the Clock Paradox: The Hafele and Keating Experiment
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K