Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

I Proper (and coordinate) times re the Twin paradox

  1. May 20, 2017 #1
    This was straying from the point in the original thread, but I thought it made a point...

    The stay-at -home twin is at rest in her frame and her clock must therefore measure proper time.
    The travelling twin, carries his clock with him; it is therefore at rest in his frame and must also measure proper time.
    As each twin is moving relative to the other, they will each measure coordinate time for their twin.
    Their proper times will be identical.
    Their coordinate times will be identical.
    As their relative speeds are the same, their Lorentz transformations will be the same.
    When the travelling twin slows on his return and comes to rest in his twin's frame they are both once again in the same frame and will have travelled exactly the same each relative to the other.

    It is only if the traveller continues past at speed that there is a time difference as they pass and that will be proper time vs coordinate time...
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 20, 2017 #2

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    No this is wrong. By the same reasoning in Euclidean space, you would conclude that the hypothenuse would have the same length as the sum of the length of the catheti in a right triangle.
     
  4. May 20, 2017 #3

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    Any clock measures proper time. It doesn't matter if they are at rest or moving, if they are inertial or non inertial, in curved spacetime or flat. They always measure proper time along their worldline.
     
  5. May 20, 2017 #4

    Mister T

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The entire point of the twin paradox is that they are not identical. One twin ages more than the other!
     
  6. May 21, 2017 #5

    Ibix

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I think you may be confused about "proper time". Proper is used in the Latin sense of "one's own". You keep writing as if proper time were a global thing, but it's not. Each clock measures it's own proper time (which is a tautology).

    The relationship of proper time to coordinate time is like the relationship of your car's odometer reading to your OS grid northing. We can have many cars at the same grid ref with different odometer readings. This might be because they started out in different places. Or it might be because they took different routes from point A to point B. So, in a sense, there's no relationship. But, think about how the OS grid is drawn. One way to do it (a bit unlikely with real geography) would be to (a) pick a direction and call it east; (b) deploy a lot of cars one mile apart in a line in the east direction; (c) set their trip odometers to zero; (d) drive them all north; (e) add a marker every time their odometers go up one mile. Now we have a grid, built using odometers and covering the whole of the country.

    Your odometer reading is like your proper time. It is the distance (SR: interval) that you personally have travelled through space (SR: spacetime). The grid northing is like coordinate time. We got an army of cars (SR: clocks) made them travel in the same direction (SR: at the same speed) and agree an odometer reading (SR: a time) to call zero. Then we build a grid from the odometer (SR: clock) readings. Then we can use our grid to identify points in space (SR: spacetime).

    The important thing about proper time is its invariance. Everyone agrees the length of your path. The important thing about coordinate time is its arbitrariness. We could have chosen a different way to define our zero point, and we could have chosen a different direction to move in.

    In the twin paradox case, the two twins have different proper times when they return for the same basic reason that they would have different odometer readings if one drove direct from London to Edinburgh and the other drove from London to Edinburgh via Manchester. If they meet up in Edinburgh and continue to Aberdeen on the same road, their odometers will show the same increase in distance since Edinburgh, but will still show a different total distance since London. In this case, since Edinburgh isn't due north of London, neither of them will have odometer readings that correspond exactly to the difference in the northings of London and Edinburgh. This is analogous to a twin paradox where the travelling twin decelerates to rest at the end of the journey, but where they are working in a frame of reference where the Earth is moving slightly.

    I hope that all makes sense.
     
  7. May 21, 2017 #6
    Yes, of course they do! Thank you!
     
  8. May 21, 2017 #7
    Yes, but any clock in its own reference frame is at rest and only measures time passing. And, in Spacial Relativity which as I understand it is where the twin paradox may be considered, identical clocks can be placed in any frame and will keep identical time - identical clocks; identical laws of science; identical conditions...
    so how do they measure different times?
    (and before any one says "acceleration" I think of one twin passing the other and synchronizing with another sibling travelling in the opposite direction avoiding any acceleration)
     
  9. May 21, 2017 #8

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    Because they are traveling on different worldlines and the proper time is the spacetime interval integrated along that worldline.

    Geometrically, this is like two identically constructed rulers measuring the length of two different paths. The resulting difference is not attributed to any distortion of the ruler, but to the length of the respective lines.
     
  10. May 21, 2017 #9

    Mister T

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    This is not true. The travelling twin's clock will show less elapsed time than the staying twin's, regardless.

    How would they measure the same time? It's been predicted by theory, and confirmed by experiment, that they are different.
     
  11. May 21, 2017 #10

    Ibix

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    They are not in identical conditions. There are many measurements you can make that will be different for the two clocks. But fundamentally, @Dale said it: two sides of a triangle are not the same length as the third side.
     
  12. May 23, 2017 #11
    OK. Lots of different points raised here - in what are often somewhat unclear, rather vague ways as they tend to assume that I am on exactly the same wavelength and am left trying to understand what point is being made.

    So let me answer or ask for clarification point by point:

    1.
    Can you please explain what you mean here?
    2.
    Surely special relativity is reciprocal - 'As A is to B, so B is to A' viewed from each of the two frames of reference? So each twin measure the other to age more?
    3.
    No, proper time is individual to each clock. It is the time passing on a clock measured by an observer holding that clock. And as Einstein's first postulate says that clock will measure time according to the same laws in whatever inertial frame it is placed in. It is the coordinate times that will vary according to the observer's motion relative to the clock.
    "A second is a second, is a second,..." is a phrase I have often read... and any clock read in its own frame will measure the same seconds. So what I am saying is that the duration of 1 second proper time in a frame is the same as 1 second proper time, measured on another clock by that other clock's local observer in that other clock's frame.
    4.
    Yes, OK, but proper time can only be a time and not a distance! Yes it is the difference in time measured between two events in Spacetime, but, the time is what would be measured by the observer holding that clock and also travelling between those Spacetime events. The time measure for that clock between those events by any other observer, is by necessity coordinate time, as it includes the spatial difference between those events in that observer's frame.

    Proper time is the time measured on a clock between two events - on a clock that passes through both events, where the two events are on that clock's world line and, measured on that clock, in that clock's frame of reference, where both events occur at location (0,0,0). Where there is a distance measured between those events it they have to be measured by an observer in another frame and it must therefore be coordinate time.
    5.
    Worldlines. An easy concept to grasp. The path of a particle through spacetime - but in what reference frame? For surely any worldline measured from the frame of that particle (or clock if you prefer) is a fixed location (t,0,0,0) moving through time... and it will have a different path for every other observer... ?
    Where the two different paths are due to the relative movements of the observers.
    The worldline measured by a remote observer from another frame, is in effect the coordinate interval, comprising the spacetime interval and the travel time measured from the observer's frame (added vectorially). This is after all the basis of the Lorentz transformation that is, at its core no more than vectorial addition by the courtesy of Pythagoras.
     
  13. May 23, 2017 #12

    Mister T

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    There's nothing vague or unclear in this statement:
    Or this one.
    The traveling twin is the one who returns, the staying twin is the one who stays. Draw the worldlines of the two twins. The worldline of the staying twin is a straight line, the worldline of the travelling twin is not.
     
  14. May 23, 2017 #13

    Nugatory

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    You have two basic misunderstandings here. You'll want to work through them first, then take on the other questions.
    Think of proper time as something that we observe: Say we design our clock so that every time it ticks it punches a hole in a piece of paper somewhere inside; we start with a fresh piece of paper at event A and remove it at event B. How many holes are there in the piece of paper? That's a simple direct observation; all observers everywhere will agree about the answer without any rigamarole about reference frames or relative velocity or time dilation. We call the number of holes in the piece of paper "the proper time along the path from A to B", and it is a fact that has nothing to do with any other observers and their notions of time, distance and speed.

    (The twin paradox can be summarized by saying that when the twins rejoin they compare their pieces of paper and find that there are more holes punched in stay-at-home's than in traveller's. This is because they took different paths through spacetime between the departure and reunion events).
    The worldline is the same in all frames and for all observers. Consider some object; in some frames it is moving fast, in others it is moving slowly or not at all, even the direction of motion is frame-dependent. But for any given point in spacetime, there are exactly two possibilities: either the worldline of the object passes through that point or it doesn't.

    If we assign coordinates using a frame in which the object is at rest we'll label the points that the worldline passes through (t,0,0,0) and if we use a frame in which the object is moving these points might be labeled (t',vt',0,0), but they're the same points and the same worldline either way. When we change frames we're changing the axes of the coordinate system we're using to assign coordinates to points, but this doesn't change the points themselves.
     
  15. May 23, 2017 #14

    Ibix

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    While both twins are under the same conditions, you can make this argument. But one of the twins turns around. Why should there be reciprocity when the twins are doing different things?
    You misunderstand me. Proper time (multiplied by c if you insist) is the spacetime equivalent of distance in space (it's called the "interval"). If I drop a ruler on a piece of graph paper its length will always be 30cm, but it's x-extent and its y-extent may vary. Similarly, proper time is the "length" of a clock's path through spacetime - whether that path is aligned with the time axis of the imaginary graph paper we call a reference frame or not.

    That is, at the core, the resolution of the twin paradox. The twins took different routes through spacetime. They can have different intervals, just like two different routes through space can have different lengths.
     
  16. May 23, 2017 #15

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    And this
    Is essentially the basic point of this
     
  17. May 23, 2017 #16

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    In any reference frame. It is invariant.

    The worldline is the geometric figure itself, irrespective of the coordinate system that you might use for describing it. One worldline will have different coordinates in different coordinate systems but it is the same worldline.

    If you have experience with hiking with a map and a compass (pre-GPS), then this might make sense: a mountain peak might have different coordinates using magnetic north and true north, but it is the same point on the map and the same mountain peak in reality.

    The reference frame is the coordinates and is just a convenient way to label points on the map.

    No, the worldline is more basic than a reference frame. It is not necessary to define a reference frame in order to have a valid worldline.

    You can draw a line on a blank piece of paper. The paper doesn't have to have a grid on it. And even without a grid on the paper, you can tell if a line is straight or bent.
     
    Last edited: May 23, 2017
  18. May 23, 2017 #17
    Another way to look at it is by the principle of maximal aging. We have 2 events in spacetime, the departure from Earth, and the return to Earth. Both twins are present at each event. The staying twin's worldline through spacetime between these two events is inertial-- he never accelerates. Thus, his path between these two events is the shortest possible path in spacetime (a single straight line on a Minkowski diagram). The traveler, on the other hand, leaves and comes back. His worldline isn't a straight line, and thus its overall length in spacetime is longer. It includes at least one instance of acceleration. The principle of maximal aging says that the shortest (inertial) path between the two events is the path of maximal aging (it's the path upon which the most proper time passes). This means that the longer your path through spacetime between two events, the less proper time is experienced along that path (approaching a light-like path, where the proper time elapsed approaches 0). Since the traveling twin's path through spacetime is longer than the staying twin's, it involves less proper time.
     
  19. May 23, 2017 #18

    PeterDonis

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    No, it's the longest. Proper time is the path length through spacetime, and the stay at home twin has longer proper time.

    No, shorter. See above.

    The inertial path is the longest; proper time = path length. See above.
     
  20. May 24, 2017 #19
    Well okay... yeah I guess its reversed. Hyperbolic geometry is a little funky in that way. The shortest path seems "longer" in a certain sense.
     
  21. May 24, 2017 #20

    Orodruin

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    There is no "shortest path". You are trying to impose your sense of a Euclidean metric on Minkowski space.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Proper (and coordinate) times re the Twin paradox
  1. RE: Twin's Paradox (Replies: 20)

  2. Twin paradox and time (Replies: 4)

Loading...