Re: Twin Paradox Question


Russell wrote:
> Sue... wrote:
> > Russell wrote:
> > > Sue... wrote:
> > > > Russell wrote:
> > > > > Sue... wrote:
> > > > > > Russell wrote:
> > > > > > > Sue... wrote:
> > > > > > > > Russell wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Sue... wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [snip]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So... what do the Jovian moons appear to both observers
> > > > > > > > > > while all this hair is growing and greying?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On the return trip, the youthful twin sees the moon zooming
> > > > > > > > > at high speed around Jupiter. It makes up all of the orbits
> > > > > > > > > that failed to be seen on the outbound trip. The total counts
> > > > > > > > > come out the same at the moment the twin gets home.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So if we use Jupiter's moons to measure his reading speed
> > > > > > > > he reads fast departing but slow returning.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If we use the *received* frequency of the moon's orbit, that is
> > > > > > > correct. Note, in our usual time coordinates this frequency is
> > > > > > > Doppler shifted, so just to be clear, let us say explicitly that
> > > > > > > we make *no* compensation for Doppler.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We can do
> > > > > > > > the same for rate of hair growth.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes indeed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You just defeated your own argument.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How so? Did you do the calculation?
> > > > > > Yeah the planet I was leaving was celebrating one birthday
> > > > > > for every two on the planet I was approaching. The
> > > > > > situation reversed on my return trip so everybody must have
> > > > > > had the number of birthdays.
> > > > >
> > > > Whoa, stick to your stupid units.
> > >
> > > [above sentence was written by me; Sue's quoting is wrong.]
> > >
> > > > No...
> > > > It is too many millimeters close to lunch to do your maths for
> > > > you.
> > >
> > > *My* maths? My maths is as explained in the FAQ, one page
> > > of which Androcles so kindly posted here, with his oh-so-helpful
> > > commentary. Everything I said here consistent with that page.
> > > (Not with the commentary.)
> > >
> > > *You* claimed that I defeated my own argument, but when pressed
> > > to justify this attack, you post a silly caricature of a "calculation"
> > > that, as I correctly point out, in no way relates to our discussion.
> > > I press you further and you run away for pizza. Disappointing.
> > >
> > <<Well, perhaps you will get back to me after lunch. >>
> > I will. Check the NG after about four furlongs. ;-)
>
> Well? You stood me up. Some possibilities:
>
<non physical possibilities snipped>


Sue...

.

Relevant Pages

  • 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)
  • Re: Twin Paradox Question
    ... > Sue... ... >> Russell wrote: ... >> count the same orbits by simple doppler. ... > hands here> the total number of birthdays was the same. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Twin Paradox Question
    ... >>> This is of course a straw man introduced by Sue. ... >> This is of course is an Aunt Sally intoduced by Russell. ... and you are correct in saying that these measurements ... That's what Sue is telling us that physicists are ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)