Is the Langevin Twins Paradox Validated by Other Experiments?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The Langevin Twins Paradox has been validated through various experiments, notably the Hafele-Keating experiment in 1971, which utilized atomic clocks on commercial airplanes. The GPS system, consisting of 24 satellites equipped with advanced atomic clocks, further confirms the predictions of relativity, demonstrating time dilation effects with high precision. While there is consensus on the validity of time dilation, debates persist regarding the underlying physical mechanisms and interpretations of these phenomena. The discussion emphasizes that the differences in clock readings are not paradoxical but rather a consequence of the principles of relativity.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Special Relativity principles
  • Familiarity with time dilation and its mathematical implications
  • Knowledge of the Hafele-Keating experiment methodology
  • Basic concepts of GPS technology and its reliance on relativistic effects
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Hafele-Keating experiment and its significance in validating relativity
  • Explore the workings of GPS technology and how it incorporates relativistic corrections
  • Study the mathematical framework of time dilation in Special Relativity
  • Investigate various interpretations of time dilation and their philosophical implications
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of relativity, engineers working with GPS technology, and anyone interested in the implications of time dilation in modern physics.

  • #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

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K