Twin paradox without length contraction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the twin paradox, specifically exploring explanations that do not involve length contraction. Participants examine different perspectives and calculations regarding the aging of two twins, one stationary on Earth and the other traveling to Alpha Centauri and back at relativistic speeds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that Twin A remains at rest while Twin B travels to Alpha Centauri at 4c/5 and ages 6 years, while Twin A ages 10 years.
  • Another participant describes how from Twin B's perspective, 3 years pass on B's clock for the round trip, leading to a time dilation effect observed for Twin A's clock.
  • Some participants propose a method where Twin B remains at rest during the outbound leg, requiring consideration of length contraction to calculate the time for each twin.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of simultaneity shifts at the turnaround point, affecting the perceived time on Twin A's clock from Twin B's perspective.
  • One participant expresses confusion about calculating the return trip length and proposes a method involving relativistic speed subtraction to find the time taken for Twin B to catch up with Twin A.
  • Another participant corrects a calculation regarding the relativistic difference in speeds between the twins, emphasizing the need for proper relativistic treatment in speed calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how to approach the calculations and perspectives of the twin paradox. There is no consensus on a single method or explanation, and the discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing viewpoints.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations rely on assumptions about simultaneity and the treatment of time dilation, which may not be universally agreed upon. The discussion also highlights the complexity of applying relativistic principles consistently across different frames of reference.

ed2288
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Hi all, apologies if this has been posted a million times before...

I'm trying to explain the twin paradox without getting involved with length contraction.

One way to think of it is Twin A remains at rest on Earth then twin B goes off at 4c/5 to Alpha centauri 4 light years away, then comes back again having aged 6 years, 3/5 as much as twin A.

Alternatively, can I think about it this way? Twin B remains at rest, while twin A and Alpha centauri speed off at 4c/5 for 5 years in the rest frame of B. When Alpha centauri reaches twin B, he suddenly accelerates to 40c/41 (relativistically added 4c/5 and 4c/5) and catches Twin A up. The lorentz factor of twin B becomes 41/9...and from here I struggle to get the nice and simple Twin A = 10 years, Twin B = 6 years like I did before.

Any advice?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, you've it from the perspective of A, so one way to look at it from B's perspective using only times is that 3 years passes on B's clock away and back, so B sees a time dilation of .6 for A while do so also, so sees only 1.8 years pass on A's clock away and back, so 3.6 years in all. However, at the point of turn-around, the simultaneity between A and B shifts from past-back to future-forward as B conceptualizes the reality of what is taking place for A's clock, for a time difference of 2 y (v / c)^2 t using the time that B measured for the one way journey after initially synchronizing with A's clock before the journey began. So when B turns around, he says that A's clock fast forwards to an additional time reading of 2 y (v / c)^2 t = 6.4 years, which added to the original time dilation read upon A's clock, will give 10 years for A and 6 years for B.
 
Last edited:
ed2288 said:
Alternatively, can I think about it this way? Twin B remains at rest, while twin A and Alpha centauri speed off at 4c/5 for 5 years in the rest frame of B. When Alpha centauri reaches twin B, he suddenly accelerates to 40c/41 (relativistically added 4c/5 and 4c/5) and catches Twin A up. The lorentz factor of twin B becomes 41/9...and from here I struggle to get the nice and simple Twin A = 10 years, Twin B = 6 years like I did before.
If you want to consider the frame where twin B is at rest during the outbound leg of the trip, you do need to take into account length contraction relative to the twin A frame, since in this frame the distance between Earth and Alpha Centauri is not 4 light years but only (3/5)*4=2.4 light years. Other than that, this method should work fine for calculating the time for each twin. In this frame the time for twin B to get from Earth to AC will be 2.4/(4/5) = 3 years, then on the return trip you have to take into account that both twin B and Earth are moving, so the time in this frame will not just be 2.4/(40/41), instead it'll take longer since the Earth is moving in the same direction as twin B but at a smaller speed. Are you having trouble figuring out the length of the return trip in this frame or does the problem lie elsewhere?
 
grav-universe said:
Well, you've it from the perspective of A, so one way to look at it from B's perspective is that 3 years passes on B's clock away and back, so B sees a time dilation of .6 for A while do so also, so sees only 1.8 years pass on A's clock away and back, so 3.6 years in all. However, at the point of turn-around, the simultaneity between A and B shifts from past-back to future-forward as B views A's clock, for a time difference of 2 y v^2 t using the time that B measured for the journey after initially synchronizing with A's clock before the journey began. So when B turns around, he says that A's clock fast forwards to an additional time reading of 2 v^2 t / (1 - (v/c)^2) = 6.4 years, which added to the time dilation read upon A's clock, will give 10 years for A and 6 years for B.
I don't think this answer is really addressing ed2288's question, the question was about figuring things out from the perspective of a single inertial frame where twin B is at rest during the outbound leg and moving at (40/41)c during the inbound leg, not about using a single non-inertial frame where B is at rest during both phases, or combining the results of two inertial frames (one where B is at rest during the outbound leg and another where B is at rest during the inbound leg), as you seem to be doing.
 
Last edited:
ed2288 said:
Alternatively, can I think about it this way? Twin B remains at rest, while twin A and Alpha centauri speed off at 4c/5 for 5 years in the rest frame of B. When Alpha centauri reaches twin B, he suddenly accelerates to 40c/41 (relativistically added 4c/5 and 4c/5) and catches Twin A up. The lorentz factor of twin B becomes 41/9...and from here I struggle to get the nice and simple Twin A = 10 years, Twin B = 6 years like I did before.

Any advice?
Oh right, thanks JesseM. :) Okay, so using only times and relative speeds while viewing things from the same inertial rest frame, then, A takes off at 4/5 c for 3 years, not 5 by the way, according to the rest frame of B. So 3 years passes for B and 1.8 years passes for A according to the rest frame of B. Then B takes off toward A at 40/41 c. Now since we are still observing the clocks from the original rest frame, we must find the time that it takes for B to catch up to A, which is v_A t / (v_B - v_A) = (4/5 c) (3 years) / (40/41 c - 4/5 c) = 13.6666 years according to a clock that remains in the original rest frame, where A travels away at v_A for a time of t, then B catches up with a difference in speeds of v_B - v_A. However, during this time, A's clock has time dilated by .6, so a time of 8.2 years will pass for A, making 1.8 years + 8.2 years = 10 years in all for A, while B's clock time dilates by 9/41, so a total time of 3 years + 3 years = 6 years passes for B when A and B meet back up.
 
Last edited:
JesseM said:
Are you having trouble figuring out the length of the return trip in this frame or does the problem lie elsewhere?

Thanks for the replies, I'm understanding this much more. In response to JesseM, yes it is this return length that I'm having difficulty calculating. Here's my tentative method which gives an answer, is this the right way of doing it?

Find the difference in speed between twin A and B by relativistically subtracting 3/5 c from 40/41 c to get 77/85 c. At this speed the lorentz factor is 85/36 meaning the Earth-AC distance contracts to (4*36/85) = 144/85 light years. So traveling at 77/85 c Twin B takes exactly 2 years to catch up with twin A. Given twin B waited 4 years to start his journey, he will have aged 4+2=6 years as expected. CORRECTION: I've just noticed 144/77 does in fact NOT equal 2! Sorry for that...
grav-universe said:
we must find the time that it takes for B to catch up to A, which is v_A t / (v_B - v_A) = (4/5 c) (3 years) / (40/41 c - 4/5 c) = 13.6666 years according to a clock that remains in the original rest frame, where A travels away at v_A for a time of t, then B catches up with a difference in speeds of v_B - v_A. However, during this time, A's clock has time dilated by .6, so a time of 8.2 years will pass for A, making 1.8 years + 8.2 years = 10 years in all for A, while B's clock time dilates by 9/41, so a total time of 3 years + 3 years = 6 years passes for B when A and B meet back up.

To me this seems a more intuitive way to do the calculation, I'm just confused as to why that simple subtraction formula holds with having to do it relativistically?
 
Last edited:
ed2288 said:
Find the difference in speed between twin A and B by relativistically subtracting 3/5 c from 40/41 c to get 77/85 c.
That should be relativistically subtract 4/5 c from 40/41 c to get 4/5 c back since this is what you relativistically added before.

[EDIT after JesseM's next post] - That is, this is the relativistic difference in speeds if you are trying to find the speed A and B now observe between themselves, otherwise just subtract them directly to find the difference in speeds according to B's original rest frame.

To me this seems a more intuitive way to do the calculation, I'm just confused as to why that simple subtraction formula holds with having to do it relativistically?
We don't need to include length contraction or simultaneity shifts since everything is done from an inertial frame, but we still need time dilation and the relativistic addition of speeds in order to transfer to a different inertial frame for the same scenario to take place.
 
Last edited:
ed2288 said:
Find the difference in speed between twin A and B by relativistically subtracting 3/5 c from 40/41 c to get 77/85 c.
Since both 3/5 c and 40/41 c are from the perspective of the same frame (the frame where twin B was at rest during the outbound leg), the difference in speed in this frame is just (40/41 - 3/5)c. You only use the formula for relativistic velocity addition/subtraction when you're comparing different frames, like if you know A is going at 0.8c in B's frame, and you know B is going at 0.5c in C's frame, and you want to know how fast A is going in C's frame.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 136 ·
5
Replies
136
Views
12K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 115 ·
4
Replies
115
Views
9K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K