Re: Twin Paradox Question


Russell wrote:
> Black Knight wrote:
> > "Russell" <russell@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:1134416159.700112.98680@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Sue... wrote:
> > >> Bob wrote:
> > >> > Let them both view the moons continuously. The earthbound observer
> > >> > sees certain periods (p1, p2, ...,pn) always. The outbound traveller
> > >> > sees (p1+delta, p2+delta,...pn+delta) and inbound
> > >> > (p1-delta,...,pn-delta). When the twins reunite, they have counted the
> > >> > same number of periods. OK, I haven't done Lorentz transformations in
> > >> > many years, so I can't give the formulae (yet) for the deltas, but I
> > >> > think that's the gist of it.
> > >>
> > >> Mathematics aside, neither you nor the theory offers a
> > >> mechanism for the twins to disagree on the number of orbits.
> > >
> > > This is of course a straw man introduced by Sue. She does
> > > not understand the twin paradox at all, and she is presenting her
> > > misunderstanding as if it were mainstream physics -- which not
> > > surprisingly, then, she claims to disagree with.
> >
> > This is of course is an Aunt Sally intoduced by Russell.
> > She does not understand the PoR at all, and she is presenting her
> > misunderstanding as if it were mainstream physics -- which not
> > surprisingly, then, she claims to disagree with.
>
> I *don't* claim to disagree with mainstream physics, and btw my
> gender is male. Furthermore (in case by "she" you mean this
> hypothetical Aunt Sally) I believe I have not mischaracterized Sue's
> position on this matter. She is free to correct me if she wishes;
> and even *you* are welcome to present evidence that I have done
> her any injustice.
>
> >
> >
> > > Both observers obviously see the *same* number of orbits, and this
> > > of course *is* the prediction of relativity.
> >
> > And they all take the same time. OBVIOUSLY. This is NOT the
> > prediction of Einstein's phuckwittery.
>
> Einstein correctly predicts what is measured by the observers'
> local clocks, and you are correct in saying that these measurements
> differ. There is nothing obvious about any of this -- you have to *do*
> the measurements. Of course you can argue over whether such
> measurements are really "time" but the measurements themselves
> are not in question (certain crackpots excepted).
>
> >
> >
> > Physicists are *not*
> > > dunces,
> > But phuckwits are, and Russell is no physicist.
>
> FWIW, I don't claim to be one.
>
> However, if we are to believe what Sue is saying about the twin
> paradox, 100% of mainstream physicists since, oh, approximately
> 1905, have been idiots. You have to be an idiot to claim that the
> moons of Jupiter orbit a different number of times for one twin than
> for the other twin. That's what Sue is telling us that physicists are
> claiming. (Which in fact they do not.) IOW, Sue is saying that
> physicists are idiots.
>
> This makes it a little hard to see why she is recommending that
> we read websites put up by *physicists* at MIT and UT, but I'm
> willing to accept that there are aspects of Sue's use of logic that
> will remain forever beyond my grasp.

Clocks are not predictably affected by motion. Their appearance
to a remote observer is affected. If you find anything on the
recommended URLs that would indicate otherwise, please bring
it to my attention.

I'll leave to the physicists at MIT and UT to explain how their beliefs

about the behavior of moving clocks correlate with their credentials.

:o)

Sue...



>
> [snip the rest]

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Twin Paradox Question
    ... Sue may be goofy about charges, but she knows what the twin paradox is all ... > paradox, 100% of mainstream physicists since, oh, approximately ... He thought Einstein was an idiot. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Twin Paradox Question
    ... >>> mechanism for the twins to disagree on the number of orbits. ... >> This is of course a straw man introduced by Sue. ... if we are to believe what Sue is saying about the twin ... paradox, 100% of mainstream physicists since, oh, approximately ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Twin Paradox Question
    ... The earthbound observer ... > This is of course a straw man introduced by Sue. ... > misunderstanding as if it were mainstream physics -- which not ... This is of course is an Aunt Sally intoduced by Russell. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A Forgotten Prediction of Einstein
    ... > Sue... ... >> Russell wrote: ... Annie and Bill are moving relatively, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: A Forgotten Prediction of Einstein
    ... > Sue... ... >> Russell wrote: ... equal horses and firing equal arms, ... If you'd like to talk about his mistakes, ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading