On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 12:05:03 PM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> 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?

They occur (at the source) after the first five and before the last five. In terms of S1 (x',t'), 5 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 35 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. In terms of S2 (x",t"), 35 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 5 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. In terms of S0 (x,t), 20 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 20 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. The mistake you are making is thinking that the flashes prior to t'(turn-around) and after t"(turn-around) constitute all the flashes, but that is obviously not true, because you are omitting the flashes that occur at the source after t'(turn-around) and before t"(turn-around). We covered all this before (and then you ran away), remember?. What part don't you understand?

On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 2:35:17 PM UTC-5, Al Coe wrote:
> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 12:05:03 PM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > 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?
> They occur (at the source) after the first five and before the last five. In terms of S1 (x',t'), 5 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 35 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. In terms of S2 (x",t"), 35 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 5 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. In terms of S0 (x,t), 20 emissions occur up to the coordinate time of the turn-around event, and 20 occur after that coordinate time, for a total of 40. The mistake you are making is thinking that the flashes prior to t'(turn-around) and after t"(turn-around) constitute all the flashes, but that is obviously not true, because you are omitting the flashes that occur at the source after t'(turn-around) and before t"(turn-around). We covered all this before (and then you ran away), remember?. What part don't you understand?

When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occur, if he says 5 flashes occurred while he traveled from A to B, and 5 flashes occurred when he traveled from B to A. When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occurred?
David Seppala
Bastrop TX

Maciej Wozniak schwrote:
> On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 18:56:42 UTC+2, Python wrote:
....
>> 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.

This is not even remotely any kind of answer. Well done kook!

On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 12:39:10 PM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occur, if he says 5 flashes occurred
> while he traveled from A to B, and 5 flashes occurred when he traveled from B to A.

Those flashes occur at the source after t'(turn-around) and before t"(turn-around), and they occur after t=5 and before t=35, and likewise they can be described in terms of infinitely many other systems of coordinates. Naturally we use coordinate systems that provide a one-to-one mapping between events and coordinates.

Remember, it makes no sense to refer to what "the traveler says", because relativity is not a subjectivist theory, i.e., it doesn't give each object its own set of facts, nor does it identify any object with any particular system of coordinates. There is only one set of objective facts, and anyone can describe those facts in terms of any system of coordinates they choose. A sensible person typically chooses a system that provides a one-to-one mapping between coordinates and events.

Now do you understand? If not, can you explain what part of this you don't follow?

On Saturday, 21 May 2022 at 22:59:04 UTC+2, Al Coe wrote:
> On Saturday, May 21, 2022 at 12:39:10 PM UTC-7, sep...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > When does the traveling twin say those 30 flashes occur, if he says 5 flashes occurred
> > while he traveled from A to B, and 5 flashes occurred when he traveled from B to A.
> Those flashes occur at the source after t'(turn-around) and before t"(turn-around), and they occur after t=5 and before t=35, and likewise they can be described in terms of infinitely many other systems of coordinates. Naturally we use coordinate systems that provide a one-to-one mapping between events and coordinates.

Naturally we do; we don't use Einstein's non-euclidean idiocies.

On May 19, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get contradictory results.
>> 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

Your derivation is mathematically correct, but scientifically unsatisfactory.
B returns younger than A; less gray hair. This is chemistry, not math.

Let's look at the specifics. What's the difference between the twins? Each has
a RF emitter and receiver. B receives Doppler shifted signals, f₁ and f₂.

Now, how does shifted RF frequencies affect B's cellular aging process?
<serious head scratching>

--
Rich

On May 19, 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?
> 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 back.
> So the round trip takes 40 seconds (assume accelerations are not significant in this problem) as
> measured in F0.
> I added 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.

Try this one:
Stationary Sam sits at A.
Add a point C, twice as far as B. Another traveler Chuck (they're triplets)
leaves C, heading toward B, at the same moment that Al leaves A, as
seen in frame F0.
Both travel at the same speed. Both cover the same distance to B.
Hence they meet at B, where Al turns, then both continue to A, together.
Both see 40 flashes. They cover the same distance, same speed, hence
the same total time interval, as measured in each frame (Al and Chuck's).
Yet on arrival, Al is younger than Sam and Chuck, who are both the same age.

Ask this group to explain that -

--
Rich

Le 23/05/2022 à 22:00, RichD a écrit :
> On May 19, Paul B. Andersen wrote:
>>>So I added an additional parameter to the twin's paradox. I seem to get
>>>contradictory results.
>>> 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
>
> Your derivation is mathematically correct, but scientifically unsatisfactory.
> B returns younger than A; less gray hair. This is chemistry, not math.
>
> Let's look at the specifics. What's the difference between the twins? Each has
> a RF emitter and receiver. B receives Doppler shifted signals, f₁ and f₂.
>
> Now, how does shifted RF frequencies affect B's cellular aging process?
> <serious head scratching>
>
> --
> Rich

Please don't take this subject as a joke.

R.H.

Frame comparison can be converging or diverging at any distance.
Those are relative equal comparisons of frames either separating or coming together in space.
That equality suggests they share the equal instead.