Harry:
The raison d'être of GR is to explain gravity.
Stephen:
That's right. But you don't need it to resolve the twins problem, which
takes place in flat space.
I am confused.
In your first response to me you started off by saying the opposite:
Harry:
That works in SR, but the
On 2/17/07, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An accelerometer is a purely local
instrument (which, of course, can't tell the difference between gravity
and acceleration).
Actually there is a way, or technically 2 ways at least. (besides the fact
that experiments have shown that
- Original Message -
From: John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 9:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
...Talking about centrifugal force, you do know that
by running around a bucket of water you incurve the water
Harry Veeder wrote:
Harry:
The raison d'être of GR is to explain gravity.
Stephen:
That's right. But you don't need it to resolve the twins problem, which
takes place in flat space.
I am confused.
In your first response to me you started off by saying the opposite:
Harry:
That
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 3:37 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
...
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem
was in fact resolved something
Michel Jullian wrote:
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, February
16, 2007 3:37 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
...
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the
problem was in fact
a bucket of water you incurve the water as if it was centrifuged
don't you? :)
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 4:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
Michel Jullian wrote
Harry Veeder wrote:
Gotta love those probabilities.
With them you can save relativity from obscurity.
Harry
Professor Resolves Einstein's Twin Paradox
Science Daily http://www.sciencedaily.com/ — Subhash Kak, Delaune
Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem was
in fact resolved something on the order of a century ago. The traveling
twin accelerates; the stay-at-home twin does not; thus, the symmetry is
broken.
That works in SR, but the solution is
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem was
in fact resolved something on the order of a century ago. The traveling
twin accelerates; the stay-at-home twin does not; thus, the symmetry is
broken.
That works in SR, but
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
...
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem was
in fact resolved something
- Original Message -
From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:43:03 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I solved the paradox
. Mcallister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 1:43 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
- Original Message -
From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW
- Original Message -
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox
Distant stars are not out of sight fortunately :)
Depends on how close to the rather light pollutive city
Michel Jullian wrote:
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, February
15, 2007 10:33 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: FW: Einstein's Twin Paradox ...
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem
was in fact
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem was
in fact resolved something on the order of a century ago. The traveling
twin accelerates; the stay-at-home twin does not; thus, the symmetry
Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
I'm going to go shovel the snow off my ~100 ft long driveway. I wonder if it
will have important future implications for quantum computers?
--Kyle
No way.
You need to be shovelling sh*t to have that affect.
;-)
Harry
Twin paradox solved by a universal static aether adjustment to SR ;)
SR is totally broken.
And no inertial acceleration doesn't solve it, the twin at home is
undergoing plenty of acceleration around the earth, around the sun, thermal
and sound vibrations.
Also the acceleration to light speed
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
This is not a paradox, and the paradoxical nature of the problem was
in fact resolved something on the order of a century ago. The traveling
twin accelerates; the stay-at-home twin does not;
19 matches
Mail list logo
