How do you solve the twins Paradox? [duplicate] Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) 2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question CollectionWhat is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?Is time dilation an illusion? Variation on the twins paradoxTwin paradox caused by gravitational difference in spaceTwins paradox questionTheory of relativity paradox?Explanation for a much simpler version of the twin paradox?What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?The twin paradox in a universe with a torus topologyTwin Paradox on steroids - who would be older?The twin Paradox, What if they never meet and they are observed by an outside observer?How do we explain this new take on the old Twins Paradox?
One-one communication
How does TikZ render an arc?
How do Java 8 default methods hеlp with lambdas?
Flight departed from the gate 5 min before scheduled departure time. Refund options
The Nth Gryphon Number
Noise in Eigenvalues plot
In musical terms, what properties are varied by the human voice to produce different words / syllables?
Is the Mordenkainen's Sword spell underpowered?
Sally's older brother
malloc in main() or malloc in another function: allocating memory for a struct and its members
How does the body cool itself in a stillsuit?
How to achieve cat-like agility?
Is a copyright notice with a non-existent name be invalid?
As a dual citizen, my US passport will expire one day after traveling to the US. Will this work?
Where and when has Thucydides been studied?
Did pre-Columbian Americans know the spherical shape of the Earth?
Besides transaction validation, are there any other uses of the Script language in Bitcoin
Any stored/leased 737s that could substitute for grounded MAXs?
How do I say "this must not happen"?
How to resize main filesystem
Why complex landing gears are used instead of simple, reliable and light weight muscle wire or shape memory alloys?
Do i imagine the linear (straight line) homotopy in a correct way?
Why are two-digit numbers in Jonathan Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" (1726) written in "German style"?
Is this Half-dragon Quaggoth boss monster balanced?
How do you solve the twins Paradox? [duplicate]
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question CollectionWhat is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?Is time dilation an illusion? Variation on the twins paradoxTwin paradox caused by gravitational difference in spaceTwins paradox questionTheory of relativity paradox?Explanation for a much simpler version of the twin paradox?What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?The twin paradox in a universe with a torus topologyTwin Paradox on steroids - who would be older?The twin Paradox, What if they never meet and they are observed by an outside observer?How do we explain this new take on the old Twins Paradox?
$begingroup$
This question already has an answer here:
What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
9 answers
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic♦ 2 days ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This question already has an answer here:
What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
9 answers
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic♦ 2 days ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This question already has an answer here:
What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
9 answers
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
This question already has an answer here:
What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
9 answers
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
This question already has an answer here:
What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
9 answers
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
edited 2 days ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
108k122001249
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
asked 2 days ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
132
132
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic♦ 2 days ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic♦ 2 days ago
This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago
3
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
answered 2 days ago
WillWill
1315
1315
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 days ago
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
2 days ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 days ago
1
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 days ago