Theoretical Question On The Twins Paradox and Heart Rate

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of the Twins Paradox in special relativity, specifically addressing the misconception that a heart rate monitor would cause the Earth-bound twin to age faster than the traveling twin. The participants clarify that time dilation affects all clocks, including biological ones, but the heart rate does not slow down for the traveling twin. Instead, the Earth twin experiences differential aging due to the effects of traveling at 95% of the speed of light, leading to a conclusion that both twins will age differently upon reunion, with the traveling twin surviving longer. The conversation also emphasizes the importance of understanding spacetime diagrams and the Lorentz transformations for grasping these concepts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of special relativity concepts, including time dilation and differential aging.
  • Familiarity with the Lorentz transformations and their mathematical implications.
  • Knowledge of spacetime diagrams and their role in visualizing relativistic effects.
  • Basic grasp of hyperbolic functions and their relation to relativistic physics.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of the Lorentz transformations in special relativity.
  • Learn how to construct and interpret spacetime diagrams for various relativistic scenarios.
  • Explore the concept of rapidity and its significance in understanding relative motion in special relativity.
  • Investigate the implications of the Doppler effect in the context of special relativity.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, educators teaching special relativity, and anyone interested in understanding the nuances of time dilation and differential aging in relativistic contexts.

  • #31
PeterDonis said:
What do you mean by ##\gamma \textbf{u}##?
What I mean is, if you start with, say, a coordinate of some moving object, (cdt, dx), ignoring the y and z directions, of course, and then divide by proper time, written as ## \frac{dt}{\gamma\ }## , you get (##\gamma \textbf{c}##, ##\gamma\ u_x##), so that second coordinate, the speed times gamma, is what I mean by ##\gamma \textbf{u}## .

So, if you multiply by invariant mass it becomes γmu, then if you take the time derivative, and then integrate over distance (after doing some manipulations with the differentials and integrating from 0 to u), you end up with a result that is identical to the relativistic kinetic energy equation.

So that's what I meant by all that. I don't know if it's mere coincidence or not, but it seems interesting to me.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Sorcerer said:
that second coordinate, the speed times gamma, is what I mean by ##\gamma \textbf{u}##.

That's the same thing that @DrGreg means by ##\gamma \textbf{v}##.
 
  • #33
Sorcerer said:
then divide by proper time, written as ##\frac{dt}{\gamma\ }##

I think you mean ##\frac{dt}{d\tau}##. The 4-velocity vector's components are

$$
U^\mu = \left( \frac{dt}{d\tau}, \frac{d \textbf{x}}{d\tau} \right) = \left( \gamma, \gamma \textbf{v} \right)
$$

(in units where ##c = 1##). Multiplying by the invariant mass ##m## then gives the 4-momentum ##P^\mu##.
 
  • #34
PeterDonis said:
I think you mean ##\frac{dt}{d\tau}##. The 4-velocity vector's components are

$$
U^\mu = \left( \frac{dt}{d\tau}, \frac{d \textbf{x}}{d\tau} \right) = \left( \gamma, \gamma \textbf{v} \right)
$$

(in units where ##c = 1##). Multiplying by the invariant mass ##m## then gives the 4-momentum ##P^\mu##.
Well, as I understand it, ##\frac{dt}{d\tau}## = γ, hence proper time must be ##\frac{dt}{γ}## . So dividing dx by that will give ##\frac{dx}{\frac{dt}{γ}}## which is ##γ\frac{dx}{dt}##, or ##γu## .But yeah the net result is exactly what you put there. I guess it is indeed a 4-velocity, except I'm ignoring y and z.

So why does that look the same as celerity? Is celerity exactly what the spatial components of 4-velocity are?
 
  • #35
Sorcerer said:
as I understand it, dtdτdtdτ\frac{dt}{d\tau} = γ, hence proper time must be ##\frac{dt}{γ}## .

If you want to treat differentials that way (which would give many rigorous mathematicians apoplexy, although most physicists wouldn't bat an eye), then yes, you can write ##d\tau = dt / \gamma##.

Sorcerer said:
So dividing dx by that will give ##\frac{dx}{\frac{dt}{γ}}## which is ##\gamma \frac{dx}{dt}##, or ##\gamma u## .

Yes, which is what @DrGreg was calling ##\gamma \textbf{v}##, as I said before (and that's how I wrote it in my post).

Sorcerer said:
So why does that look the same as celerity?

Because, as @DrGreg posted, celerity is equal to ##\gamma \textbf{v}##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K