Why Does the Twin Paradox Not Prove Einstein's Relativity Wrong?

In summary, the twin paradox is a paradox that arises from the principle of relativity, in which an object travelling at high speed (near the speed of light) would experience time passing more slowly for the twin on the shuttle than for the twin on Earth. Although this paradox was originally proposed as evidence that Einstein's theory of relativity was flawed, it has since been debunked. The applet on the PBS website provides a fun way to understand the paradox.
  • #1
nuclear420
17
0
One of the thought experiments Einstein proposed involved one twin staying on earth, while the second twin entered a shuttle. The twin in the shuttle went on a trip (a physical one), traveling near the speed of light. The twin in the shuttle would have time pass by slower than the one on the Earth, resulting in him being younger than his Earth twin when he returned.

The Question:
Since relativity is relative, can't we assume a reference frame where the shuttle is stationary and the Earth moves away and comes back near the speed of light? This would result in the opposite outcome, a contradiction. I know that this was originally proposed by physicists as proof that Einstein's relativity was flawed, but later debunked. Can anyone explain to me, in laymen terms, why it doesn't work?

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
-- Albert Einstein
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
nuclear420 said:
One of the thought experiments Einstein proposed involved one twin staying on earth, while the second twin entered a shuttle. The twin in the shuttle went on a trip (a physical one), traveling near the speed of light. The twin in the shuttle would have time pass by slower than the one on the Earth, resulting in him being younger than his Earth twin when he returned.

The Question:
Since relativity is relative, can't we assume a reference frame where the shuttle is stationary and the Earth moves away and comes back near the speed of light? This would result in the opposite outcome, a contradiction. I know that this was originally proposed by physicists as proof that Einstein's relativity was flawed, but later debunked. Can anyone explain to me, in laymen terms, why it doesn't work?

If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
-- Albert Einstein

>>> If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.
Yes, indeed. The crux of the problem lies in how to compare time with a moving clock? How many stationary clocks do you need to compare time with a moving clock? That's the key. If you figure this out, you will see why you have been fooled by this paradox.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
nuclear420 said:
The Question:
Since relativity is relative, can't we assume a reference frame where the shuttle is stationary and the Earth moves away and comes back near the speed of light? This would result in the opposite outcome, a contradiction. I know that this was originally proposed by physicists as proof that Einstein's relativity was flawed, but later debunked. Can anyone explain to me, in laymen terms, why it doesn't work?
It doesn't work because the time dilation equation is only intended to be used in inertial reference frames, meaning a spacetime coordinate system where an object at rest in those coordinates would be moving inertially forever, never accelerating. The shuttle is not moving inertially when it turns around (any change in speed or direction is an acceleration, and will be felt as G-forces so it's an objective thing whether or not you accelerated in special relativity), so it can't just take the Earth's relative velocity to it at all times and then plug that into the time dilation equation to predict how much the Earth twin will age.

For way more info on the twin paradox and various ways of understanding it, see this page:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/TwinParadox/twin_paradox.html
 
  • #4
Hey there! I asked a similar question not too long ago and after hours of searching for an answer, I found this really helpful site - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/hotsciencetwin/. I’m so glad I bookmarked it! You’ve got to check out the applet! It’s so funny! It always makes me laugh when I see it. ;)
 

Related to Why Does the Twin Paradox Not Prove Einstein's Relativity Wrong?

1. What is the twin rocket experiment?

The twin rocket experiment is a thought experiment used to explain the concept of relativity in physics. It involves two identical rockets, one on Earth and one in outer space, with synchronized clocks. The rocket in outer space experiences time dilation due to its high velocity, causing it to age slower than the rocket on Earth.

2. How does the twin rocket experiment demonstrate relativity?

The twin rocket experiment demonstrates relativity by showing that time can be relative depending on the observer's frame of reference. The rocket in outer space is moving at a high velocity relative to the rocket on Earth, causing time to pass slower for the astronaut on the spaceship. This supports Einstein's theory of special relativity.

3. Why is the twin rocket experiment important?

The twin rocket experiment is important because it helps to explain the concept of relativity, which is a fundamental principle in modern physics. It also has real-world applications, such as in GPS systems which must account for time dilation due to the satellites' high velocities.

4. What other experiments are similar to the twin rocket experiment?

Other experiments that demonstrate the concept of relativity include the muon decay experiment and the Hafele-Keating experiment. Both of these experiments also involve measuring the effects of time dilation due to high velocities.

5. Can the twin rocket experiment be physically conducted?

No, the twin rocket experiment is a thought experiment and cannot be physically conducted due to the challenges and limitations of space travel. However, its principles have been proven through other experiments and observations in the field of physics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
666
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
946
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
70
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
2K
Back
Top