Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

Memory fault -- brain fried


tech / sci.physics.relativity / Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

SubjectAuthor
* Twin's paradox contradiction?sepp623@yahoo.com
+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Python
|+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
||`- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?rotchm
|`* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
| `- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?rotchm
+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Tom Roberts
|`* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
| `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Tom Roberts
|  +* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?J. J. Lodder
|  |`- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
|  `- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Paul B. Andersen
|+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Richard Hachel
||`- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?rotchm
|`* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?RichD
| `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Richard Hachel
|  `- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?mitchr...@gmail.com
+- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?The Starmaker
+- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?The Starmaker
+* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Al Coe
|`* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?sepp623@yahoo.com
| +- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Richard Hachel
| `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Al Coe
|  +* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
|  |`* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Python
|  | `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
|  |  `- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Python
|  `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?sepp623@yahoo.com
|   `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Al Coe
|    `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?sepp623@yahoo.com
|     `* Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Al Coe
|      `- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?Maciej Wozniak
`- Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?RichD

Pages:12
Twin's paradox contradiction?

<2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90500&group=sci.physics.relativity#90500

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:9382:0:b0:6a3:2f58:1a9e with SMTP id v124-20020a379382000000b006a32f581a9emr2168078qkd.494.1652968466374;
Thu, 19 May 2022 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5915:0:b0:2f3:db7f:7ad8 with SMTP id
21-20020ac85915000000b002f3db7f7ad8mr3799669qty.77.1652968466215; Thu, 19 May
2022 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 06:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.68.112.95; posting-account=KIU1KgoAAABBrhv4Cds7EoUZYGmdFnx_
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.68.112.95
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: sepp...@yahoo.com (sepp623@yahoo.com)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 13:54:26 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 3886
 by: sepp623@yahoo.com - Thu, 19 May 2022 13:54 UTC

In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0. So the light flashes a total of 40 times during the traveling twin's round trip, and the traveling twin receives 40 flashes.
From the point of view of the traveling twin, the distance from A to B is only 10 * sqrt(3)/2 light seconds, so his clock shows and elapsed time of 10 seconds to arrive at B. Likewise the return trip only takes 10 seconds as measured by the traveling twin. Using the Lorentz transform, the traveling twin measures that the flash rate of the light is one flash every two seconds. So the traveling twin says 10 flashes occurred during the round trip. Going from A to B the traveling twin only receives a couple of flashes before he gets to B. However, returning from B to A, the traveling twin receives around 37 or 38 flashes. Since the light at A during the return leg is traveling toward the traveling twin the numbers result in the twin receiving those flashes in 10 seconds. However, with the 37 or 38 flashes at a rate of one flash every two seconds as measured by the traveling twin, the traveling twin must conclude the first and second flash received during the return leg of the journey occurred a distance of 74 to 76 light-seconds away from the traveling twin. But the traveling twin is never more than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds from A where the light is located.
Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds, and explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.
Thanks,
David Seppala
Bastrop TX

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90506&group=sci.physics.relativity#90506

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!cleanfeed1-a.proxad.net!nnrp2-2.free.fr!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
From: pyt...@invalid (Python)
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 17:26:37 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 May 2022 17:26:49 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 78.193.54.197
X-Trace: 1652974009 news-2.free.fr 18388 78.193.54.197:51206
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
 by: Python - Thu, 19 May 2022 15:26 UTC

sepp623@yahoo.com wrote:
> In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
> The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0.

Oh dear... This is covered in ANY Relativity book or course, even in
sci.physics FAQ for DECADES...

You will try, in vain, to find flaws in SR until you'll die, instead of
simply LEARNING it, David, right? Why that? We KNOW (it is PROVEN) that
SR is consistent. It may be "false" in the sense that it will be
subsumed by a more general theory (as a matter of fact, it has been by
GR), but NOTHING you could do will end up in a inconsistency...

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90507&group=sci.physics.relativity#90507

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 11:15:39 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 12:15:38 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
From: tjrobert...@sbcglobal.net (Tom Roberts)
In-Reply-To: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 27
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-ZI9M2L61vd4otrsiaq1MFqxDyG+AlThghhfX3eQNoMEg2FhaPXO1NDMsY7FLeNCA1as/ohXYz5sB5Gs!7+Pti/OAjBZ40MrwrkFUN9Cx2SjeQrGYxsLSNWUeIsIvypZK7yWX9mfmrQA05vtqalXtaUmPCMo=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2371
 by: Tom Roberts - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:15 UTC

On 5/19/22 9:54 AM, sepp623@yahoo.com wrote:
> [...]

[I ignore the off-by-one ambiguity of whether the light
starts with a flash or a gap between flashes.]

Your approach is incorrect. You are attempting to apply "time dilation"
and "length contraction" to a physical situation in which they are
woefully inadequate. And you completely ignored both the Doppler effect
and the travel times of the light flashes.

[I put those phrases in "scare quotes" because they are
poor names for the actual phenomena -- they have duped
you into thinking they apply, when in fact they lead
you astray.]

A correct analysis shows that the traveling twin receives 40 light
flashes, most of which come during the second half of their trip. That
analysis is straightforward but tedious -- several textbooks do
something similar, and you can probably find it on the 'net.

BOTTOM LINE: do not ever apply "time dilation" or "length contraction",
because they are very limited in applicability -- always use the Lorentz
transform. Most of your posts and confusions are due to not following
this rule.

Tom Roberts

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<25363f26-6247-4dca-8c4d-3237f8f90bb6n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90508&group=sci.physics.relativity#90508

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1008:b0:2f3:cded:9075 with SMTP id d8-20020a05622a100800b002f3cded9075mr4540362qte.550.1652977409115;
Thu, 19 May 2022 09:23:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:290:b0:2f3:b28d:22a with SMTP id
z16-20020a05622a029000b002f3b28d022amr4645383qtw.446.1652977408947; Thu, 19
May 2022 09:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 09:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.25.5.69; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.25.5.69
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <25363f26-6247-4dca-8c4d-3237f8f90bb6n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23:29 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2797
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:23 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 17:26:51 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> > In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
> > The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0.
> Oh dear... This is covered in ANY Relativity book or course, even in

Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
and trying to pretend he knows something.
Tell me, poor stinker, what is your definition of
a "theory" in the terms of Peano arithmetic?
See: if a theorem is going to be a part of a theory,
it has to be formulable in the language of the
theory. Do you get it? Or are you too stupid even for
that, poor stinker?

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90509&group=sci.physics.relativity#90509

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:b312:0:b0:45a:a8d7:ecd6 with SMTP id s18-20020a0cb312000000b0045aa8d7ecd6mr4627620qve.100.1652977494219;
Thu, 19 May 2022 09:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a797:0:b0:6a3:2db9:45b4 with SMTP id
q145-20020a37a797000000b006a32db945b4mr2916864qke.171.1652977494059; Thu, 19
May 2022 09:24:54 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 09:24:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.25.5.69; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.25.5.69
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:24:54 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1630
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:24 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 18:15:48 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote:

> BOTTOM LINE: do not ever apply "time dilation" or "length contraction",
> because they are very limited in applicability -- always use the Lorentz
> transform. Most of your posts and confusions are due to not following
> this rule.

In the meantime in the real world, however, forbidden
by your insane religion GPS and TAI keep measuring t'=t,
just like all serious clocks always did.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<4b847f81-2aca-458b-9a4c-c7e2384e91dcn@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90510&group=sci.physics.relativity#90510

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:38b:b0:2f3:dcce:a7a3 with SMTP id j11-20020a05622a038b00b002f3dccea7a3mr4508145qtx.439.1652977540373;
Thu, 19 May 2022 09:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:f712:0:b0:6a3:4797:1d23 with SMTP id
s18-20020ae9f712000000b006a347971d23mr809979qkg.300.1652977540222; Thu, 19
May 2022 09:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!news.mixmin.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 09:25:40 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=83.25.5.69; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 83.25.5.69
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <4b847f81-2aca-458b-9a4c-c7e2384e91dcn@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:25:40 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:25 UTC

On Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 17:26:51 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> > In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
> > The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0.
> Oh dear... This is covered in ANY Relativity book or course, even in
> sci.physics FAQ for DECADES...
>
> You will try, in vain, to find flaws in SR until you'll die, instead of
> simply LEARNING it, David, right? Why that? We KNOW (it is PROVEN) that
> SR is consistent. It may be "false" in the sense that it will be
> subsumed by a more general theory (as a matter of fact, it has been by
> GR), but NOTHING you could do will end up in a inconsistency...

5 points for every word written with capital letters, BTW.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<cdcb0fda-e9f5-47a0-b533-5e30e9bd7982n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90511&group=sci.physics.relativity#90511

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:621:b0:432:5e0d:cb64 with SMTP id a1-20020a056214062100b004325e0dcb64mr4722164qvx.65.1652977961774;
Thu, 19 May 2022 09:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1e12:b0:2f3:d254:45b7 with SMTP id
br18-20020a05622a1e1200b002f3d25445b7mr4630197qtb.88.1652977961491; Thu, 19
May 2022 09:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 09:32:41 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <25363f26-6247-4dca-8c4d-3237f8f90bb6n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.160.32.227; posting-account=BHsbrQoAAAANJj6HqXJ987nOEDAC1EsJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.160.32.227
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <25363f26-6247-4dca-8c4d-3237f8f90bb6n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <cdcb0fda-e9f5-47a0-b533-5e30e9bd7982n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: rot...@gmail.com (rotchm)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:32:41 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1744
 by: rotchm - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:32 UTC

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 12:23:30 PM UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:

> Oh, stinker Python is opening its muzzle again,
> and trying to pretend he knows something.
> Tell me, poor stinker, what is your definition of
> a "theory" in the terms of Peano arithmetic?
> See: if a theorem is going to be a part of a theory,
> it has to be formulable in the language of the
> theory. Do you get it? Or are you too stupid even for
> that, poor stinker?

Spam reported.
I incite others to do the same.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<b43d0f24-2ddd-41f1-81eb-e209eb727501n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90512&group=sci.physics.relativity#90512

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:20ec:b0:461:dc16:163d with SMTP id 12-20020a05621420ec00b00461dc16163dmr4748575qvk.40.1652978027973;
Thu, 19 May 2022 09:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4249:b0:6a3:303b:6d26 with SMTP id
w9-20020a05620a424900b006a3303b6d26mr2699634qko.0.1652978027792; Thu, 19 May
2022 09:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 09:33:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4b847f81-2aca-458b-9a4c-c7e2384e91dcn@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.160.32.227; posting-account=BHsbrQoAAAANJj6HqXJ987nOEDAC1EsJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.160.32.227
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<628661b9$0$18388$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <4b847f81-2aca-458b-9a4c-c7e2384e91dcn@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b43d0f24-2ddd-41f1-81eb-e209eb727501n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: rot...@gmail.com (rotchm)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:33:47 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 1458
 by: rotchm - Thu, 19 May 2022 16:33 UTC

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 12:25:41 PM UTC-4, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:

> 5 points for every word written with capital letters, BTW.

This does not address the OP in any way.
Spam reported.
I incite others to do the same.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<kHvhK.2561250$8b1.879145@fx01.ams4>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90517&group=sci.physics.relativity#90517

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!news.neodome.net!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!81.171.65.16.MISMATCH!peer03.ams4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx01.ams4.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Content-Language: en-GB
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
From: paul.b.a...@paulba.no (Paul B. Andersen)
In-Reply-To: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <kHvhK.2561250$8b1.879145@fx01.ams4>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@eweka.nl
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 18:07:12 UTC
Organization: Eweka Internet Services
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:07:11 +0200
X-Received-Bytes: 4763
 by: Paul B. Andersen - Thu, 19 May 2022 18:07 UTC


Den 19.05.2022 15:54, skrev sepp623@yahoo.com:
> In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
> The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0. So the light flashes a total of 40 times during the traveling twin's round trip, and the traveling twin receives 40 flashes.
https://paulba.no/pdf/TwinsByDoppler.pdf
> From the point of view of the traveling twin, the distance from A to B is only 10 * sqrt(3)/2 light seconds, so his clock shows and elapsed time of 10 seconds to arrive at B. Likewise the return trip only takes 10 seconds as measured by the traveling twin. Using the Lorentz transform, the traveling twin measures that the flash rate of the light is one flash every two seconds. So the traveling twin says 10 flashes occurred during the round trip. Going from A to B the traveling twin only receives a couple of flashes before he gets to B. However, returning from B to A, the traveling twin receives around 37 or 38 flashes. Since the light at A during the return leg is traveling toward the traveling twin the numbers result in the twin receiving those flashes in 10 seconds. However, with the 37 or 38 flashes at a rate of one flash every two seconds as measured by the traveling twin, the traveling twin must conclude the first and second flash received during the return leg of the journey occurred a distance of 74 to 76 light-seconds away from the traveling twin. But the traveling twin is never more than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds from A where the light is located.
> Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds, and explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.
> Thanks,
> David Seppala
> Bastrop TX
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<V0TKOOCp-YpB8lhw1cmf54i2d4E@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90518&group=sci.physics.relativity#90518

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <V0TKOOCp-YpB8lhw1cmf54i2d4E@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <kHvhK.2561250$8b1.879145@fx01.ams4>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: z-osxN2AJPAvdpdS6q6BunYOEB0
JNTP-ThreadID: 2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=V0TKOOCp-YpB8lhw1cmf54i2d4E@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Thu, 19 May 22 18:20:56 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/101.0.4951.67 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="fe2eacdbccdca2c9073534d4b8089b794a40c561"; logging-data="2022-05-19T18:20:56Z/6913400"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Thu, 19 May 2022 18:20 UTC

>> In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So
>> I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory
>> results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
>
>> In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated
>> by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the
>> other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels
>> back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the
>> traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to
>> travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations
>> are not significant in this problem) as measured in F0.
>
>> The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0
>> is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That
>> light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0. So
>> the light flashes a total of 40 times during the traveling twin's round trip, and
>> the traveling twin receives 40 flashes.

You have to read the answers you get.
Some may be interesting.

R.H.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<c17df26c-f743-4df3-ba37-0b840768ce5en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90521&group=sci.physics.relativity#90521

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5b96:0:b0:2f8:af64:a0bd with SMTP id a22-20020ac85b96000000b002f8af64a0bdmr5184965qta.463.1652990622782;
Thu, 19 May 2022 13:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a37:f518:0:b0:680:a811:1ef7 with SMTP id
l24-20020a37f518000000b00680a8111ef7mr4223537qkk.765.1652990622618; Thu, 19
May 2022 13:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 13:03:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <V0TKOOCp-YpB8lhw1cmf54i2d4E@jntp>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=184.160.32.227; posting-account=BHsbrQoAAAANJj6HqXJ987nOEDAC1EsJ
NNTP-Posting-Host: 184.160.32.227
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<kHvhK.2561250$8b1.879145@fx01.ams4> <V0TKOOCp-YpB8lhw1cmf54i2d4E@jntp>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c17df26c-f743-4df3-ba37-0b840768ce5en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: rot...@gmail.com (rotchm)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:03:42 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2535
 by: rotchm - Thu, 19 May 2022 20:03 UTC

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 2:21:00 PM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote:
<snip>

On Tuesday, May 17, 2022 at 10:41:33 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote:
> Le 17/05/2022 à 14:56, rotchm a écrit :
> > Given a reference frame which has been coordinated, two events are said to be
> > "simultaneous" when the clocks
> > located at the events in question indicate the same value.
> This is one of the biggest bullshit I've ever heard from a guy who
> understood the theory of relativity.

Its a definition. Don't you know what a definition is? Whats its purpose, its use?
No answer?

> Relativity says exactly the opposite, and if it does not say so, it is
> because it is badly explained.

I've now told/explained it to you. Now you should know.

> If I synchronize two similar watches and I separate them both in the same
> way and on the same distance, but opposite, they will NEVER simultaneously
> mark the same time between them.

You are confused. We were not talking about synching watches. We were talking about
the *simultaneity* of two *events*. See your first sentence of your OP.

No rebuttal?

"synchronize two similar watches and I separate them"
has nothing to do with your OP; it has nothing to do with simultaneity.
Try to remain on topic.

No rebuttal?

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<6286B62F.360B@ix.netcom.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90529&group=sci.physics.relativity#90529

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: starma...@ix.netcom.com (The Starmaker)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 14:27:11 -0700
Organization: The Starmaker Organization
Lines: 23
Message-ID: <6286B62F.360B@ix.netcom.com>
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="df38d65b03d32368276aa9e85d954ec3";
logging-data="26136"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+0ZGxHnYGFHoz3plv/on8gAq29S+/1e5E="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7DxnFxqMeje0P9qwlzunK5Tnv7M=
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220519-8, 05/19/2022), Outbound message
 by: The Starmaker - Thu, 19 May 2022 21:27 UTC

sepp623@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significa
> The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0. So the light flashes a total of 40 times during the traveling twin's round trip, and the traveling twin receives 40 flashes.
>
> Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds, and explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.
> Thanks,
> David Seppala
> Bastrop TX

Who sent you here?

You've been reading too many textbooks.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<6286B7ED.7AFD@ix.netcom.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90531&group=sci.physics.relativity#90531

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: starma...@ix.netcom.com (The Starmaker)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 14:34:37 -0700
Organization: The Starmaker Organization
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <6286B7ED.7AFD@ix.netcom.com>
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="df38d65b03d32368276aa9e85d954ec3";
logging-data="26136"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/nCcdG/iHnC4sV/dowqmQ5FCiHbdCDzys="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:yeaciCp2A/SFC6wfzOagIjROgNA=
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U)
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220519-8, 05/19/2022), Outbound message
 by: The Starmaker - Thu, 19 May 2022 21:34 UTC

sepp623@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> In response to a previous post, Coe suggested it was like the twin's paradox. So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results. Can anyone explain things for me? Here's the scenario.
> In inertial reference frame F0, there are two points, A and B, separated by a distance of L = 20 * sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds. One twin stays at A, while the other twin travels from A to B with a velocity of V = c*sqrt(3)/2, and then travels back from B to A with a velocity of V = -c*sqrt(3)/2. As measured in F0, the traveling twin takes 20 seconds to travel from A to B, and then 20 seconds to travel back from B to A. So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significa
> The parameter I added to the scenario is a light that is stationary in F0 is positioned at A. When the traveling twin leaves A he turns the light on. That light then starts flashing at a rate of one flash per second as measured in F0. So the light flashes a total of 40 times during the traveling twin's round trip, and the traveling twin receives 40 flashes.
>
> Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds, and explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.
> Thanks,
> David Seppala
> Bastrop TX

This, like many of your other scenarios, is the problem of trying to
apply
time dilation formulas when you switch inertial reference frames, which
is
what you do every single time the traveler turns a corner of the
polygon.
The line of simultaneity changes every time.
To cue it simply, this is just another variant of the twin “paradox”,
where
there is a round trip that necessitates a change in inertial reference
frames for at least one of the players. The lesson to be taught in all
of
these cases is that it is a mistake to try to insist that the symmetry
of
time dilation formulas should still apply. It does not. It never does in
cases where there is a change in inertial reference frames. In these
cases,
it will be a reality that BOTH players note, that less time has elapsed
for
one player than for the other. One twin really does come back younger
than
the other.
All you are doing is adding signals passed back and forth between the
players. That’s fine, and the twin “paradox” has been discussed with
signals being passed between the twins. (See reference given). The
accounting at the frame switches is what’s important.
To see this in action, look at the last section of Chapter 2 in Robert
Mills’ book Space, Time, and Quanta.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge
the unchallengeable.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90538&group=sci.physics.relativity#90538

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:bcc2:0:b0:6a3:2a79:a960 with SMTP id m185-20020a37bcc2000000b006a32a79a960mr4647826qkf.645.1653001650089;
Thu, 19 May 2022 16:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:494:b0:2f3:c0b0:599c with SMTP id
p20-20020a05622a049400b002f3c0b0599cmr5920960qtx.95.1653001649919; Thu, 19
May 2022 16:07:29 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 16:07:29 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:601:1700:7df0:4804:cc44:f549:ba27;
posting-account=Y-6T7gkAAAADbEonmv3EfcSDfKdp_jnx
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:601:1700:7df0:4804:cc44:f549:ba27
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: coeal5...@gmail.com (Al Coe)
Injection-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 23:07:30 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2271
 by: Al Coe - Thu, 19 May 2022 23:07 UTC

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 6:54:27 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate [at the source]
> is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds...

Letting S1 and S2 denote the inertial coordinate systems in which the traveling
twin is at rest on his outbound and return legs, respectively, the turn-around event
at B is simultaneous with the 10th emission event in terms of S1, and it is simultaneous
with the 30th emission event in terms of S2. This is determined by grids of standard
rulers and clocks at rest and inertially synchronized in terms of their respective frames.

> ...explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-
> seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light
> must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.

That does not happen. See above. As always, you have failed to account for the relativity
of simultaneity.

Special Relativity: 869 .... Barnpole Dave: 0

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90545&group=sci.physics.relativity#90545

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 19:39:19 -0500
Date: Thu, 19 May 2022 20:39:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>
From: tjrobert...@sbcglobal.net (Tom Roberts)
In-Reply-To: <b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 28
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-95lcJBn5NCm+LPwrMqyehqu/wsWjexx20Tyx/riR1osaMQsiOgXn53aqWcYHEz01VZKIabQGucegO5l!IVW2URT9qpgwBf2Vkdq4gHH2vUmAEmxhvnpKhwohUNUwcTJ7MQe3lbSkhQzxLSI8DSP8O/7xRt0=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2468
 by: Tom Roberts - Fri, 20 May 2022 00:39 UTC

[I generally ignore Wozniak's nonsense, but occasionally will respond.]

On 5/19/22 12:24 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> In the meantime in the real world, [...] GPS and TAI keep measuring
> t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.

This is WRONG. What actually happens is:

MODIFIED AND TRANSPORTED t' = t

That is, unlike what your equation is attempting to say, the standard
time coordinate in the satellite (t') does NOT equal the time coordinate
on the ground (t) -- TAI and/or GPS time. The clocks in the GPS
satellites are MODIFIED so that when their signals are received on the
ground, those SIGNALS tick at the same rate as TAI and GPS time [#].
That permits the satellite clocks to be synchronized with GPS time in
the sense that the MODIFIED clocks display GPS time at their current
location, resulting in a coordinate system valid everywhere inside the
GPS satellite orbits, in which light propagates in vacuum isotropically
with speed c.

[#] Hint: signals are not clocks.

You CLEARLY do not understand this.

[I now resume ignoring your idiotic postings.]

Tom Roberts

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<1ps8xg3.13zsu21qfpj54N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90562&group=sci.physics.relativity#90562

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: nos...@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 10:03:27 +0200
Organization: De Ster
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <1ps8xg3.13zsu21qfpj54N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com> <lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Reply-To: jjlax32@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1016f7d31973e1c7c6f4ba693f5774a7";
logging-data="18559"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18m6ffyttogd+oAiSlFCo/eUnWjWSRE8Es="
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.10.5)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:WP0UuxSgD0++sSMWPjg11dKOgc0=
 by: J. J. Lodder - Fri, 20 May 2022 08:03 UTC

Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> [I generally ignore Wozniak's nonsense, but occasionally will respond.]
>
> On 5/19/22 12:24 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > In the meantime in the real world, [...] GPS and TAI keep measuring
> > t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.
>
> This is WRONG. What actually happens is:
>
> MODIFIED AND TRANSPORTED t' = t
>
> That is, unlike what your equation is attempting to say, the standard
> time coordinate in the satellite (t') does NOT equal the time coordinate
> on the ground (t) -- TAI and/or GPS time. The clocks in the GPS
> satellites are MODIFIED so that when their signals are received on the
> ground, those SIGNALS tick at the same rate as TAI and GPS time [#].
> That permits the satellite clocks to be synchronized with GPS time in
> the sense that the MODIFIED clocks display GPS time at their current
> location, resulting in a coordinate system valid everywhere inside the
> GPS satellite orbits, in which light propagates in vacuum isotropically
> with speed c.
>
> [#] Hint: signals are not clocks.
>
> You CLEARLY do not understand this.
>
> [I now resume ignoring your idiotic postings.]

Woz' problem lies even deeper.
He also doesn't understand clocks on Earth,
so he doesn't understand what TAI and GPS time are,

Jan

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<a817812f-eeac-48ad-b65d-24aebdcb29b2n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90566&group=sci.physics.relativity#90566

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5d8b:0:b0:2f3:df07:d752 with SMTP id d11-20020ac85d8b000000b002f3df07d752mr6758201qtx.528.1653036198593;
Fri, 20 May 2022 01:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:e86:b0:461:ca87:44aa with SMTP id
hf6-20020a0562140e8600b00461ca8744aamr7301097qvb.112.1653036198408; Fri, 20
May 2022 01:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 01:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>
<lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <a817812f-eeac-48ad-b65d-24aebdcb29b2n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 08:43:18 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2127
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Fri, 20 May 2022 08:43 UTC

On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 02:39:27 UTC+2, tjrob137 wrote:
> [I generally ignore Wozniak's nonsense, but occasionally will respond.]
>
> On 5/19/22 12:24 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > In the meantime in the real world, [...] GPS and TAI keep measuring
> > t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.
> This is WRONG. What actually happens is:
>
> MODIFIED AND TRANSPORTED t' = t

Modified and transported t'=t is still a special case
of t'=t. Sorry. Did I say "unmodified t'=t"? For sure I didn't.
What you say is not denying what I say.

> That is, unlike what your equation is attempting to say, the standard
> time coordinate in the satellite (t') does NOT equal the time coordinate

What a pity that people making real measurements in
the real world have different standards than a bunch of
insane gedankers...

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<58ed4f6e-2b90-4ffa-aab1-e168d04daf93n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90567&group=sci.physics.relativity#90567

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1301:b0:2f3:af1d:aa57 with SMTP id v1-20020a05622a130100b002f3af1daa57mr6860369qtk.257.1653036273618;
Fri, 20 May 2022 01:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:4249:b0:6a3:303b:6d26 with SMTP id
w9-20020a05620a424900b006a3303b6d26mr4618570qko.0.1653036273488; Fri, 20 May
2022 01:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 01:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1ps8xg3.13zsu21qfpj54N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<ibKdna7P4ti28Bv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <b6130bdf-b615-43f6-85dd-cf3370d349cfn@googlegroups.com>
<lr2dnS91GaCqfhv_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <1ps8xg3.13zsu21qfpj54N%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <58ed4f6e-2b90-4ffa-aab1-e168d04daf93n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 08:44:33 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2916
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Fri, 20 May 2022 08:44 UTC

On Friday, 20 May 2022 at 10:03:31 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> Tom Roberts <tjrobe...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > [I generally ignore Wozniak's nonsense, but occasionally will respond.]
> >
> > On 5/19/22 12:24 PM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > > In the meantime in the real world, [...] GPS and TAI keep measuring
> > > t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.
> >
> > This is WRONG. What actually happens is:
> >
> > MODIFIED AND TRANSPORTED t' = t
> >
> > That is, unlike what your equation is attempting to say, the standard
> > time coordinate in the satellite (t') does NOT equal the time coordinate
> > on the ground (t) -- TAI and/or GPS time. The clocks in the GPS
> > satellites are MODIFIED so that when their signals are received on the
> > ground, those SIGNALS tick at the same rate as TAI and GPS time [#].
> > That permits the satellite clocks to be synchronized with GPS time in
> > the sense that the MODIFIED clocks display GPS time at their current
> > location, resulting in a coordinate system valid everywhere inside the
> > GPS satellite orbits, in which light propagates in vacuum isotropically
> > with speed c.
> >
> > [#] Hint: signals are not clocks.
> >
> > You CLEARLY do not understand this.
> >
> > [I now resume ignoring your idiotic postings.]
> Woz' problem lies even deeper.
> He also doesn't understand clocks on Earth,
> so he doesn't understand what TAI and GPS time are,

Well, it's actually you not understranding it, Lod.
Brainwashed fanatic idiots never understand much.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90622&group=sci.physics.relativity#90622

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2412:b0:6a0:5f8e:c050 with SMTP id d18-20020a05620a241200b006a05f8ec050mr8955773qkn.462.1653139149628;
Sat, 21 May 2022 06:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:f712:0:b0:6a3:4797:1d23 with SMTP id
s18-20020ae9f712000000b006a347971d23mr6317370qkg.300.1653139149473; Sat, 21
May 2022 06:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 06:19:09 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.68.112.95; posting-account=KIU1KgoAAABBrhv4Cds7EoUZYGmdFnx_
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.68.112.95
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: sepp...@yahoo.com (sepp623@yahoo.com)
Injection-Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 13:19:09 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 2622
 by: sepp623@yahoo.com - Sat, 21 May 2022 13:19 UTC

On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 6:07:31 PM UTC-5, Al Coe wrote:
> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 6:54:27 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Please clarify how the traveling twin determines that the flash rate [at the source]
> > is one flash every two seconds while he receives 40 flashes in 20 seconds...
>
> Letting S1 and S2 denote the inertial coordinate systems in which the traveling
> twin is at rest on his outbound and return legs, respectively, the turn-around event
> at B is simultaneous with the 10th emission event in terms of S1, and it is simultaneous
> with the 30th emission event in terms of S2. This is determined by grids of standard
> rulers and clocks at rest and inertially synchronized in terms of their respective frames.
>
> > ...explain how the traveling twin is never a distance greater than 10*sqrt(3)/2 light-
> > seconds away from the flashing light (located at A) yet some flashes from the light
> > must travel 74 to 76 light-seconds from A to the traveling twin.
> That does not happen. See above. As always, you have failed to account for the relativity
> of simultaneity.
>
> Special Relativity: 869 .... Barnpole Dave: 0

In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the turn-around event at B. How far did the flash from the first emission event travel and what is the flash rate of the emission events in S2?
Thanks,
David Seppala

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<NFUeeTRWwIpOBKmvfHjZZBIdLsQ@jntp>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90624&group=sci.physics.relativity#90624

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!from-devjntp
Message-ID: <NFUeeTRWwIpOBKmvfHjZZBIdLsQ@jntp>
JNTP-Route: news2.nemoweb.net
JNTP-DataType: Article
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com> <730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>
<82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
JNTP-HashClient: UetrDRAO8Ut1el43MG_8TpMVbN8
JNTP-ThreadID: 2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com
JNTP-Uri: http://news2.nemoweb.net/?DataID=NFUeeTRWwIpOBKmvfHjZZBIdLsQ@jntp
User-Agent: Nemo/0.999a
JNTP-OriginServer: news2.nemoweb.net
Date: Sat, 21 May 22 16:02:55 +0000
Organization: Nemoweb
JNTP-Browser: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/101.0.4951.67 Safari/537.36
Injection-Info: news2.nemoweb.net; posting-host="aa011848b7e5fab309d8429722c85cb3ea1cd875"; logging-data="2022-05-21T16:02:55Z/6918957"; posting-account="4@news2.nemoweb.net"; mail-complaints-to="newsmaster@news2.nemoweb.net"
JNTP-ProtocolVersion: 0.21.1
JNTP-Server: PhpNemoServer/0.94.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-JNTP-JsonNewsGateway: 0.96
From: r.hac...@tiscali.fr (Richard Hachel)
 by: Richard Hachel - Sat, 21 May 2022 16:02 UTC

Le 21/05/2022 à 15:19, "sepp623@yahoo.com" a écrit :

> In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
> turn-around event at B.
> Thanks,

Simultaneous for who? ? ?

> David Seppala

R.H.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90625&group=sci.physics.relativity#90625

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1212:b0:2f3:bd14:1ec6 with SMTP id y18-20020a05622a121200b002f3bd141ec6mr11553794qtx.342.1653149495018;
Sat, 21 May 2022 09:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:311:b0:2f3:ddb0:4ae6 with SMTP id
q17-20020a05622a031100b002f3ddb04ae6mr11507155qtw.140.1653149494821; Sat, 21
May 2022 09:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 09:11:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2601:601:1700:7df0:41bf:8dd7:3c0f:49ef;
posting-account=Y-6T7gkAAAADbEonmv3EfcSDfKdp_jnx
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2601:601:1700:7df0:41bf:8dd7:3c0f:49ef
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com> <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: coeal5...@gmail.com (Al Coe)
Injection-Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 16:11:35 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2418
 by: Al Coe - Sat, 21 May 2022 16:11 UTC

On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:19:11 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
> turn-around event at B.

Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 35th emission event.

> How far did the flash from the first emission event travel...

In terms of S2 the first pulse (emitted in terms of S0 at 1 second after the traveler departed) travels a distance of v(1+v)/[(1-v)sqrt(1-v^2)], using units so c=1. This is about 24.124 light-sec for your specified v.

> and what is the flash rate of the emission events in S2?

It is 0.5 pulses per second (one pulse per 2 seconds). I think we covered all this before. If you have a problem with any of this, go ahead and state what the problem is. Otherwise it's difficult to know how to clarify things for you.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<c1c34ca8-61cd-4c12-9c1b-93c0e1d05d6an@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90626&group=sci.physics.relativity#90626

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:613:b0:2f3:f918:280a with SMTP id z19-20020a05622a061300b002f3f918280amr11518055qta.216.1653149974891;
Sat, 21 May 2022 09:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5f85:0:b0:461:e790:e812 with SMTP id
jp5-20020ad45f85000000b00461e790e812mr11979135qvb.56.1653149974756; Sat, 21
May 2022 09:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 09:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com> <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
<05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c1c34ca8-61cd-4c12-9c1b-93c0e1d05d6an@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 16:19:34 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2239
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Sat, 21 May 2022 16:19 UTC

On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 18:11:36 UTC+2, Al Coe wrote:
> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:19:11 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
> > turn-around event at B.
> Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 35th emission event.
>
> > How far did the flash from the first emission event travel...
>
> In terms of S2 the first pulse (emitted in terms of S0 at 1 second after the traveler departed) travels a distance of v(1+v)/[(1-v)sqrt(1-v^2)], using units so c=1.

And in terms of GPS, clocks are indicating t'=t, just like all
serious clocks always did.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<628919c7$0$9169$426a74cc@news.free.fr>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90628&group=sci.physics.relativity#90628

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!paganini.bofh.team!pasdenom.info!nntpfeed.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!cleanfeed1-b.proxad.net!nnrp1-1.free.fr!not-for-mail
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com>
<82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
<05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
<c1c34ca8-61cd-4c12-9c1b-93c0e1d05d6an@googlegroups.com>
From: pyt...@invalid (Python)
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 18:56:36 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c1c34ca8-61cd-4c12-9c1b-93c0e1d05d6an@googlegroups.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <628919c7$0$9169$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Organization: Guest of ProXad - France
NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 May 2022 18:56:39 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 176.150.91.24
X-Trace: 1653152199 news-1.free.fr 9169 176.150.91.24:39638
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
 by: Python - Sat, 21 May 2022 16:56 UTC

Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
> On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 18:11:36 UTC+2, Al Coe wrote:
>> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:19:11 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
>>> turn-around event at B.
>> Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 35th emission event.
>>
>>> How far did the flash from the first emission event travel...
>>
>> In terms of S2 the first pulse (emitted in terms of S0 at 1 second after the traveler departed) travels a distance of v(1+v)/[(1-v)sqrt(1-v^2)], using units so c=1.
>
> And in terms of GPS, clocks are indicating t'=t, just like all
> serious clocks always did.

I don't like serious clocks, they are boring. I prefer fancy
clock you can dance on the beach with....

Anyway, according to one of the greatest logician Humanity ever
had, how t' =/= t would have as consequences practically? If
you claim that t' = t hd should be able to tell, right?

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<0b8803cd-9b4c-4e84-b0ee-b0e9a4f75903n@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90636&group=sci.physics.relativity#90636

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:248c:b0:6a0:54f8:9077 with SMTP id i12-20020a05620a248c00b006a054f89077mr9799814qkn.500.1653159029377;
Sat, 21 May 2022 11:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:43a4:b0:6a2:e7dc:40c2 with SMTP id
a36-20020a05620a43a400b006a2e7dc40c2mr9586388qkp.404.1653159029253; Sat, 21
May 2022 11:50:29 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 11:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <628919c7$0$9169$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=89.206.14.16; posting-account=I3DWzAoAAACOmZUdDcZ-C0PqAZGVsbW0
NNTP-Posting-Host: 89.206.14.16
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com> <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
<05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com> <c1c34ca8-61cd-4c12-9c1b-93c0e1d05d6an@googlegroups.com>
<628919c7$0$9169$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <0b8803cd-9b4c-4e84-b0ee-b0e9a4f75903n@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: maluwozn...@gmail.com (Maciej Wozniak)
Injection-Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 18:50:29 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2992
 by: Maciej Wozniak - Sat, 21 May 2022 18:50 UTC

On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 18:56:42 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
> > On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 18:11:36 UTC+2, Al Coe wrote:
> >> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:19:11 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>> In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
> >>> turn-around event at B.
> >> Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 35th emission event.
> >>
> >>> How far did the flash from the first emission event travel...
> >>
> >> In terms of S2 the first pulse (emitted in terms of S0 at 1 second after the traveler departed) travels a distance of v(1+v)/[(1-v)sqrt(1-v^2)], using units so c=1.
> >
> > And in terms of GPS, clocks are indicating t'=t, just like all
> > serious clocks always did.
> I don't like serious clocks, they are boring. I prefer fancy
> clock you can dance on the beach with....

Well, Pyt, you're a true idiot, but I bet you're still able
to imagine where I have your preferences.

> Anyway, according to one of the greatest logician Humanity ever
> had, how t' =/= t would have as consequences practically?

Your insane religion, poor stinker, demands clocks to
be not only desynchronized, but also running with different
speeds. That's what is proper according to it.

Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?

<1523f4b1-7ab1-4c84-a97d-42c9515d033en@googlegroups.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/tech/article-flat.php?id=90640&group=sci.physics.relativity#90640

 copy link   Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
X-Received: by 2002:a37:2f04:0:b0:663:397d:7051 with SMTP id v4-20020a372f04000000b00663397d7051mr9697346qkh.333.1653159902440;
Sat, 21 May 2022 12:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1e12:b0:2f3:d254:45b7 with SMTP id
br18-20020a05622a1e1200b002f3d25445b7mr11854435qtb.88.1653159902328; Sat, 21
May 2022 12:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 12:05:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.68.112.95; posting-account=KIU1KgoAAABBrhv4Cds7EoUZYGmdFnx_
NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.68.112.95
References: <2ca1b1cb-3554-4229-82f5-3f0301c33ab4n@googlegroups.com>
<730d69bd-a6a1-41e6-afc4-63ca8653ec26n@googlegroups.com> <82c5c159-47b8-4856-8aa6-9e7d34042ea2n@googlegroups.com>
<05bdbb8c-1cd4-4a0d-a33d-e15745ed629en@googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <1523f4b1-7ab1-4c84-a97d-42c9515d033en@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Twin's paradox contradiction?
From: sepp...@yahoo.com (sepp623@yahoo.com)
Injection-Date: Sat, 21 May 2022 19:05:02 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 2889
 by: sepp623@yahoo.com - Sat, 21 May 2022 19:05 UTC

On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 11:11:36 AM UTC-5, Al Coe wrote:
> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 6:19:11 AM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > In frame S2, you state the 30th emission event was simultaneous with the
> > turn-around event at B.
> Sorry, what I meant to say is that in terms of the inertial coordinate system S1 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 5th emission event, and in terms of the inertial coordinate system S2 the turn-around event is simultaneous with the 35th emission event.
>
> > How far did the flash from the first emission event travel...
>
> In terms of S2 the first pulse (emitted in terms of S0 at 1 second after the traveler departed) travels a distance of v(1+v)/[(1-v)sqrt(1-v^2)], using units so c=1. This is about 24.124 light-sec for your specified v.
> > and what is the flash rate of the emission events in S2?
> It is 0.5 pulses per second (one pulse per 2 seconds). I think we covered all this before. If you have a problem with any of this, go ahead and state what the problem is. Otherwise it's difficult to know how to clarify things for you.

If the flash rate is one pulse per 2 seconds on the return trip which takes the traveler 10 seconds to go from B to A, and the flash rate is one pulse per 2 seconds when the traveler goes from A to B in 10 seconds during the first leg of the journey, when does the traveler say the other 30 flashes (for a total of 40 flashes) occurred?
David Seppala
Bastrop TX

Pages:12
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor