Understanding Einstein's Twin Paradox, past the usual level?

[ernestpworrel]

This is all incorrect. Einstein did answer the paradox just fine, using special relativity; and he never said the special theory was wrong applied to the twins. It isn't wrong at all -- and Einstein solved the problem just fine. Indeed it is not really about acceleration at all. It is about the proper time integrated over your world line. An accelerated observer always has more elapsed time than an inertial observer, when they return to a common point; but you still solve the problem by integrating proper time; and that is a function of velocity. You don't need to use acceleration.

Cheers -- sylas

Cheers, sylas. You're right again.

 

[Al68]

Then I read where he accounted for the inability of Special Relativity to "answer" the paradox and this inability was one motive for the General theory. He even admitted that the Special theory was WRONG when applied to the twins. "a defect in epistomology" An error in the theory of knowledge.

Did you read Einstein's own subsequent twin paradox resolution, then? Although he uses a different method to deal with the acceleration, the end result is the same as in the standard SR resolutions.

 

[Dale]

The twin paradox is a paradox in every sense of the word.

Not in the technical sense of the word. It is not a logical contradiction.

 

[marxmarvelous]

physicsdude30: Yes, GR is the correct transformation for time and space. The totality of matter in the universe enters those equations. If you would like to discuss this please reply. Jack and Jill needn't be consulted abut which formulas to trust. Ever see a picture of the two guys that the government bought tickets to go arond the world--both ways? And loaned them Naval Observatory clocks. There is a site that covers how they didn't properly consider the drift rate of the clocks.