[General] STR twin Paradox
Wolfgang Baer
wolf at nascentinc.com
Sat Jun 10 23:17:42 PDT 2017
I cannot answer everyone individually but I realize I have not been
clear enough so I’ll make a few comments on your responses and try
again. Please see the write-up after the comments and let me know if I
made a mistake in calculating the test of Einstein’s theory I included
at the end.
John Willamson
No I have not read your 2015 SPIE paper I do not think I ever got a
Proceedings. But I have no problem with the math or the derivations but
a more fundamental issue of what kind of reality are we being asked to
imagine.
Graham Blackwell
Yes That was my mistake I got the prime and unprimed mixed up it has
been corrected
Richard Gauthier
That is exactly it in a symmetric experiment both twins clocks run the
same , the third persons point of view is critical.
Hodge
Yes of course it has to be the right clock, a pendulum clock won’t work
in the thought experiment, but there are plenty of reasons it cannot be
carried out in practice. And you are right to question whether the
assumption that the dilation principle works for all clocks when we do
not know the mechanism for all clocks is a streach.
Chip Akins
The observer plays a pivotal role because it is in his imagination that
all these thought experiments are carried out
Chandra
We are thinking along the same lines except that the universal complex
Tension Field will turn out to be your own
*MY SECOND TRY *
Ref: The clock paradox in a static homogeneous gravitational field URL
*https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0604025*
This is a very complex analysis involving general relativity. The
trick in this paper and all I’ve seen is to explain the clock paradox
using Einstein’s relativity involves two reference frames. In the
stationary twin’s frame velocity of the moving twin causes the slow
down of the moving twins clock as predicted by special relativity. In
the frame of the moving twin his clocks are stationary but gravity
(using the equivalence principle) from general relativity causes the
slow down. Here is a picture:
In the above referenced paper phase 3 and 4 are symmetric to 1 and 2
so are not separately identified. In both frames the twin 1’s clocks
in the rocket slow down so there is no paradox. But since both frames
see the other twin move with the same velocity and acceleration,
special relativity, as Einstein originally explained it, gave rise to
a paradox. Einstein required gravity and the equivalence principle to
explain the asymmetry. This lead to a very complex and I suggest
incorrect view of reality.
To understand this we must remember that points of view of both twins
and the transformations between them were derived from a 3d person
perspective that is an absolute background space provided by
Einstein’s and Lorentz’s imagination. We could add Maxwell and all who
believe what they see in front of their noses is reality. This is
wrong. One can never take the observer in this case the 3’d person out
of consideration. The 3d person never sees or imagines the reality of
the two twins. He imagines his own interpretation of stimulation as
objects on a background space that is always supplied by himself.( the
walls of Platos cave)
Once one realizes that the imaginings of Einstein were images
projected on his background display space, (i.e Plato not Aristotle)
then one can ask what is the difference between the reality of the two
twins? And to answer this question we can simply ask them. Twin 1
feels no force. Twin 2 feels a force, we call it gravity.
The difference between the two twins is simply that the speed of
electromagnetic interaction depends upon the gravitational field in
which the physical material of twin 1 or twin 2 or observer 3 is
subject to. The physical material is NOT the observable objects
appearing in front of our noses. That is why in the symmetric thought
experiment I proposed both twins would have identical times on their
clocks, but both would have their clocks would be delayed relative to
the 3d person, ( As Gauthier suggested).Now I repeat what I believe to
be the correct theory:
*Einstein’s special relativity interpretation gives the wrong world view
of reality. *
The two clocks do not slow down because they are moving relative to each
other. Their rates are determined by their complete Lagrangian Energy L
= T-V calculated relative to the observer observing them. In case that
is a universal 3^d person it is relative to the fixed star shell of the
universe. The potential gravitational energy of a mass inside the fixed
stars shell is
Eq. 1)V= -mc^2 = -m∙M_u ∙G/R_u .
Here M_u and R_u are the mass and radius of the star shell and R_u is
also the Schwarzchild radius of the black hole each of us is living in..
A stationary clock interval is Δt its Lagrangian energy is L= m∙c^2
A moving clock interval is Δt’ its Lagrangian energy is L= ½∙m∙v^2 +m∙c^2
Comparing the two clock rates and assuming the Action is an invariant
Eq. 2)(m∙c^2 ) ∙ Δt = A = _(½∙m∙v^2 +m∙c^2 ) ∙ Δt’
Dividing through by m∙c^2 gives
Eq. 3)Δt = Δt’ ∙ (1 + ½∙v^2 /c^2 )
Which to first order approximation is equal to
Eq. 4)Δt = Δt’/(1 - v^2 /c^2 )^1/2
Since the second order terms are on the order of v^4 /c^4 I believe
Einstein’s theory has not been tested to the second term accuracy. In
both theories the moving clock interval is smaller when the clock moves
with constant velocity in the space of an observer at rest.
The additional important point is that equation 1 shows that the speed
of light is not constant but rather depends upon the gravitational
potential. The higher the gravitational potential the faster this speed.
The speed of light is constant in each of our imagination i.e.
perceptive space but it should be called our individual speed of now.
I often make trivial math mistakes so please correct me if you see a
problem.
Thanks
Wolf
Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170610/fbada158/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: iblejofemnldpcgo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 33777 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170610/fbada158/attachment.png>
More information about the General
mailing list