Twin paradox alone kills special relativity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the twin paradox in the context of special relativity, exploring the implications of time dilation and the effects of acceleration on the aging of two twins, one of whom travels in a spaceship while the other remains on a planet. Participants analyze the paradox from different frames of reference and question the validity of special relativity based on their interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that the twin paradox demonstrates a fundamental flaw in special relativity, suggesting that both twins should be the same age upon reunion due to their symmetric situations.
  • Another participant counters that the paradox arises from neglecting the effects of acceleration and deceleration, asserting that proper relativity accounts for these factors and resolves the paradox.
  • Some participants emphasize the importance of considering non-inertial frames in the analysis of the twin paradox, suggesting that acceleration is not relative and must be factored into any conclusions drawn.
  • There are claims that any theory predicting one twin to be younger than the other is fundamentally flawed, as both perspectives can be analyzed symmetrically.
  • One participant expresses frustration with those who claim to disprove established physics without fully understanding the complexities of relativity.
  • Another participant highlights the need for careful consideration of all details in special relativity to avoid misinterpretations of the paradox.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the implications of the twin paradox and the validity of special relativity. Some argue for its correctness when accounting for acceleration, while others maintain that it is fundamentally flawed based on their interpretations of symmetry.

Contextual Notes

The discussion reveals a lack of consensus on the interpretation of the twin paradox and its implications for special relativity. Participants have differing views on the role of acceleration and the nature of symmetry in the problem.

kenn2010
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
twin paradox alone kills special relativity:

the story:

A stays on the planet, B round-travels by spaceship;
when back, based on spectral relativity, B youngs.



analysis:
when special relativity is be applied, the property difference between planet and spaceship is never used; so, first let's simplify the paradox, to avoid confusions to some easily confused minds, that:

A stays in the spaceship 1, B round-travels by spaceship 2;
when back, based on special relativity, B youngs.


Now, the above judgement based on special relativity is made from the standpoint of A & spaceship 1, that B & spaceship 2 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on.

however, if from the standpoint of B, then A & spaceship 1 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on; then, also based on the great theory of einstein's special relativity, we conclude A will be younger.



So...

Based on the same the great theory of einstein's special relativity, we could conclude B to be younger when they meet again, and we can conclude A to be younger when they meet again.




So...

the great theory of einstein's special relativity is fundamentally flawed;
and any theory or theorem or equation building on this foundation, must be re-examinated.






As a matter of fact, borrowing the spirit of "relativity", A and B are completely symmetric,

so...

of course, when back, A and B must be of the same age. any theory predict one of the twin younger than the other must the wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The idea behind the twin paradox is at first this anti-symmetry of age happens, when in fact through the analysis of SR, we have to take into account the acceleration and deceleration of the spaceship. The problem with the paradox is that the rules of SR are applied blindly, without considering the acceleration effects. If proper relativity is applied everything works. SR is not flawed in this sense it is that the non-inertial frames of acceleration/deceleration were not involved. You need to re-examine the paradox by involving those frames.
 
andron2000, I don't know what you are talking about. read my post again, again,... then look at your own replay again.
 
kenn2010 said:
however, if from the standpoint of B, then A & spaceship 1 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on;
No. Acceleration is NOT relative and the frame of accelerating observer is not inertial.
 
Usually, when a person doesn't understand a complex thing, they scratch their heads and say something like, "I don't get it," or "Could someone explain this."

Only with Relativity, it seems, do the ignorant regularly claim that they've been able to disprove all of modern physics. Why is that? Does it have something to do with a need to demonstrate that one is equal to or superior to a particular person, Einstein (you've disparaged him multiple times)? I think there is a lot to be learned here in the field of psychology.
 
so,

kenn2010, you don't know what you are talking about. Go and find out before making ridiculous sweeping statements.
ZikZak said:
Only with Relativity, it seems, do the ignorant regularly claim that they've been able to disprove all of modern physics. Why is that? Does it have something to do with a need to demonstrate that one is equal to or superior to a particular person, Einstein (you've disparaged him multiple times)? I think there is a lot to be learned here in the field of psychology.
Good point.
 
Kenn, The point I am making is your analysis is wrong. Dead Boss pointed out that acceleration is not an inertial frame. You have to learn how to incorporate those into your analysis to resolve these types of paradox. SR is real subtle on how you have to approach the problem, you have to think your way through every possible detail before making claims.
 
case 1: in the frame of A, A and B are not symmetric.
case 2: in the frame of B, A and B are not symmetric.

but in the more outer loop, case 1 and case 2 are completely symmetric.

so, any unsymmetric prediction is wrong. any theory predicts wrong prediction is fundamentally flawed.

mans, just wake up, don't waste your life. fix this fundamental bug first, then move on.
 
  • #10

Similar threads

High School Einstein's Twin Paradox: Confusing Solution?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Undergrad Twin Paradox Resolution
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Undergrad Lorentz Contraction & Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Undergrad Twin paradox for (accelerated) dummies?
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
High School Twin Paradox: Orbital Geodesics, Gravity, & Time Dilation
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
High School My paraphrased explanation of the Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
Undergrad The Mirror Paradox: Exploring Special Relativity Theory
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
Undergrad Can anyone clarify the relativistic twin paradox for me?
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
Undergrad Reference systems and apparent counter-explanations on Twin Paradox
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School The twin paradox and black holes
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K