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

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter nuclear420
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Experiment Rocket
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Twin Paradox, a thought experiment in Einstein's theory of relativity, specifically addressing why it does not contradict the principles of relativity. Participants explore the implications of different reference frames and the nature of time dilation in relation to acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the Twin Paradox scenario where one twin travels at near-light speed while the other remains on Earth, leading to the traveling twin being younger upon return.
  • Another participant questions the validity of the paradox by suggesting that if the shuttle's frame is considered stationary, the Earth could be seen as moving, potentially leading to contradictory outcomes.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that the time dilation equation applies only in inertial reference frames, noting that the shuttle experiences acceleration when it turns around, which complicates the application of the equation.
  • One participant mentions the need for multiple stationary clocks to compare time with a moving clock, suggesting that this is crucial to understanding the paradox.
  • Another participant shares a link to a resource they found helpful in understanding the Twin Paradox, indicating that there are various ways to approach the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of the Twin Paradox and the application of time dilation, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a consensus on the resolution of the paradox.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of distinguishing between inertial and non-inertial frames in the context of the Twin Paradox, as well as the role of acceleration in the analysis of time dilation.

nuclear420
Messages
17
Reaction score
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
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:
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
 
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. ;)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
7K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K