Twin paradox on another planet

i-am
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hello!

I'm new here, and already did a search. Sorry if the answer is elsewhere, I just couldn't find it!

I'm writing a sci-fi novel and have been brushing up on general and special relativity.

I'm running into a small problem with the twin paradox, and how to describe it from another planets point of view. Maybe I'm not understanding it because I have the math wrong, so please bear with me.

Disregard speeding up and slowing down, Earth math goes:

if

t=2d/v

then if the travel distance between two planets is 6 light years and we are traveling at .8c, then

t=2(6)/.8c= then t=15

So 15 years of travel time @ 80% the speed of light from Earth to Planet A.

if the Lorentz factor holds
fba9a3a968db9bd8a8c0990b21406175.png
then E=.6 as the time aged on ships clocks and and travelers age.

So the pilot of the ship would have aged 6 years, but on Earth people would have aged 15 years by the time the traveler would have reached planet A.

I'm sorry if this is incorrect. I haven't taken a physics class in a long time and I'm getting a lot of this math from wiki, and other various websites.

But if I am on Planet B, and I have 30 hours in a day, and 487 days in a year, then will all the math above still hold?

If light travels at 186282 miles per second no matter what planet one is on, and I am on Planet B trying to make sense of the twin paradox for the first time, will my traveling twin still have only aged 6 years, and I 15, planet B time?

For some reason this doesn't make sense in my head.

So I'm wondering if I'm missing something else here.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I figured it out.

Still would like a double check though.

All I would have to do is divide:

days in a year on Earth / days in a year on Planet B

365/487 = .7494 or .75 for easiness sakes.

So if time passed on ship is 6 years, then 6 x .75 = 4.5

So if time passed on Earth is 15 years, then 15 x .75 = 11.25.

Planet B would have aged 11.25 years, for their day/night/year cycle. And according to planet B's time cycle, age on ship would have only been 4.5 years.

Correct?

And I'm assuming if Planet B has no idea of "Earth" time cycles, then a physicist greater than I will ever be would have to figure out the other stuff?
 
I don't know why you have that factor of 2 in there. It seems to me that in the earth/planet rest frame it will take 7.5 years and 4.5 years on the ship's clock.
 
ghwellsjr said:
I don't know why you have that factor of 2 in there. It seems to me that in the earth/planet rest frame it will take 7.5 years and 4.5 years on the ship's clock.

Thank you!

I think what I was doing was the factor of 2 was for the round trip I had been calculating at first, then for some reason I forgot to take it out of the equation.

So, yes, you are correct.

But then I would just 7.5 x .75 and on planet B it would see 5.62 years have passed? Correct?

Thank you for that. I've been trying to figure out why it would take so long for a one way trip! And the whole time my cheat sheet was for round trips, and not for just a straight, single distance :)
 
Now you're asking about non-relativistic issues but I don't know why you mentioned the 30-hour day if you're not going to use it in your conversion. To avoid confusion, you should always say "earth-hour" or "planet-hour" so that your audience knows what your intention is.
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
98
Views
7K
Back
Top