I guess I should have put "stationary" in quotes.

Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Joseph B. Reid
> Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 11:28
> To: U.S. Metric Association
> Subject: [USMA:20401] Re: Fwd: Re: Yesterday's Star Trek on BBC 2
>
>
> I think that Bill Potts in USMA 20399 has made the wrong assumption that A
> is stationary and that B is moving.  That is contrary to the basic
> postulate of relativity that there is no such condition as stationary;
> there is only motion relative to each other.
>
> >John:
> >
> >I believe you have that one wrong. The slowing of the local clock as one
> >approaches the speed of light is independent of the direction of travel.
> >
> >The only problem with respect to the twins is that a really
> enormous amount
> >of energy would be required to carry out the experiment. However, the
> >traveling twin would indeed be younger than the stay-at-home one.
> >
> >The twin traveling close to the speed of light would not, of course, be
> >aware of the slowing of the clock. That slowing is only as
> "viewed" from a
> >stationary vantage point.
> >
> >Bill Potts, CMS
> >Roseville, CA
> >http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> >> Behalf Of kilopascal
> >> Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 21:03
> >> To: U.S. Metric Association
> >> Subject: [USMA:20398] Re: Fwd: Re: Yesterday's Startrek on BBC 2
> >>
> >>
> >> 2002-06-13
> >>
> >> This reminds me of the common belief that if out of a pair of
> >> twins, one who
> >> travels in space and another who remains on earth, the
> returning traveller
> >> will find his twin who remained behind older looking.  This is
> >> known as the
> >> twin paradox.  But, as we know, nature abhors paradoxes, so the way the
> >> SCI-FI writers have presented it is wrong.
> >>
> >> As Joe pointed out, the observer (Twin remaining on Earth) (A)
> >> will observe
> >> his twin in space (B) ageing less as his clock is running slower
> >> as he moves
> >> away at the speed of light.  The common belief is that when B
> returns to
> >> Earth, he is noticeably younger.  The truth is, that as the ship turns
> >> around and moves back towards the earth at the speed of light,
> >> the opposite
> >> occurs. B's clock now appears to move faster than on earth and B's age
> >> catches up to that of A on the Earth.  When B steps off the ship,
> >> he is the
> >> same age as his brother.  The only difference will be the normal
> >> ageing that
> >> took place because the trip would have consumed some time.
> Thus time is
> >> conserved and nature remains in balance.
> >>
> >> John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Joseph B. Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Sent: Thursday, 2002-06-13 20:57
> >> Subject: [USMA:20396] Re: Fwd: Re: Yesterday's Startrek on BBC 2
> >>
> >>
> >> > Madan wrote in USMA 20395:
> >> >
> >> > >Few months back, I had an argument with my friend
> >> > >about the time travel and back to the future concept.
> >> > >
> >> > >He said that we will be in same time, if we travel
> >> > >in the speed of light.
> >> > >My argument is this
> >> > >1. even if our spaceship is to move a few meters,
> >> > >    it is going to take atleast few picoseconds.
> >> > >2. its going to take few minutes to make a sandwich.
> >> > >
> >> > >The duration taken to do something is called time.
> >> > >
> >> > >Is the concept of 'time' a real thing like distance,
> >> > >electricity, etc or just a virtual thing.
> >> > >
> >> > >Madan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > As long as we stay on earth there is no problem.  Two persons
> >> at the same
> >> > place can set their clocks to agree.  It is when they try to
> compare the
> >> > time when they are moving apart that things get complicated.
>  Michelson
> >> and
> >> > Morley tried to find the speed by which we are moving through
> >> the ether in
> >> > which light waves travel.  They failed.  Einstein theorized
> >> that if A and
> >> B
> >> > are moving apart at high speed, A will observe that B's
> >> surroundings have
> >> > shrunk and his clock seems to be running slow to compensate and
> >> thus keep
> >> > the apparent speed of light around B constant.  At the same time, B
> >> > observes that A's surroundings have shrunk and A's clock is
> >> running slow.
> >> > Hence the relativity or reciprocity of the situation.  If C is midway
> >> > between A and B, he will observe that A's clock and B's clock are
> >> > synchronized.
> >> >
> >> > Joseph B.Reid
> >> > 17 Glebe Road West
> >> > Toronto  M5P 1C8             Tel. 416 486-6071
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
>
> Joseph B.Reid
> 17 Glebe Road West
> Toronto  M5P 1C8             Tel. 416 486-6071
>

Reply via email to