Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:38:44 -0700
On Jul 19, 5:42 am, "Martin Hogbin" <goatREMOVETHIS...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[...]
What we can tell is that, when the two twins meet up, the travelling
twin has aged less than the earthbound twin.
Some quite creative electrodynamics (or some
creative orbital choreography, Yikes! ) are required to
explain why twins would disagree on the number of
orbits that Jupiter's moons made while they were
separated.
One could argue that inertial clocks run as quickly as possible
and that the best way of describing what has happened is
to say that the non-inertial (travelling) twin's clock has been
slowed down.
If light moved inertially, some creative electrodynamics
might indeed be cobbled up to those ends.
Since light does not move as Newton thought, inertially.
http://nobelprize.org/physics/articles/ekspong/index.html
....there is hardy a case to accept an absurdity that
results from known faulty assumtions.
With factual assumptions, the twins age equally and
the SR postulates are resolved.
<<A Lorentz transformation or any other coordinate
transformation will convert electric or magnetic
fields into mixtures of electric and magnetic fields,
but no transformation mixes them with the
gravitational [or inertial by equivalence] field. >>
http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-58/iss-11/p31.html
"The [ ] Incompatibility of the Law of Propagation of
Light with the Principle of Relativity [is only] Apparent"
http://www.bartleby.com/173/7.html
Sue...
....
--
Martin Hogbin- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: Jeckyl
- Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- References:
- Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: cosmosco
- Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: Daryl McCullough
- Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: bill
- Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- From: Martin Hogbin
- Twin paradox revisited ll
- Prev by Date: Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- Next by Date: Re: E=F/q=vB Magnetic Force does not work on the charge
- Previous by thread: Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- Next by thread: Re: Twin paradox revisited ll
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|