0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 22/02/2024 13:06:30and both are moving at the same speed relative to himThere's the catch. He needs to know something more than just what the clocks are telling him.
and both are moving at the same speed relative to him
The paradox is why anyone thinks it is a paradox. And the answer is inertia and vanity.
And my definition of synchronism is that A knows what time B is showing, just from observing his own clock and nothing else.
Something is called a paradox if it seems like there's a contradiction, but a closer look can determine that there are errors in the line of thought leading to that contradiction.
On the other hand, if the contradiction is inherently within the described situation, and no error can be found in the reasoning, then the conclusion is to reject the proposition. It's called proof by contradiction.
Twin paradox is called paradox by those who accept STR. They think that it doesn't cause a real contradiction.
On the other hand, critics of STR think that twin paradox actually demonstrate a contradiction, instead of just a paradox. It causes them to reject STR.
the coordination of something like video and its soundtrack
That would be a seeming paradox, not an actual paradox.
My favorite are the articles claiming STR does not predict the Sagnac effect, and it's pretty trivial to spot the errors in these papers. Why does light travel west faster than it does east? Can you explain that in STR terms without violating its premise about the constancy of light speed?
No, the speed of light in a vacuum is constant regardless of the direction it travels, whether west, east, or any other direction. This is a fundamental principle of physics established by the theory of special relativity.It's true that Earth rotates eastward, and objects on its surface, like airplanes, can travel faster eastward than westward due to this rotation. However, this doesn't affect the speed of light itself. Light travels independently of the motion of the source or observer.There might be some confusion due to the Sagnac effect, which is a phenomenon observed in rotating reference frames. It predicts a minuscule difference in the travel time of light depending on its direction relative to the rotation. However, this effect is incredibly small and only significant in very precise measurements with extremely sensitive equipment.For all practical purposes and everyday situations, the speed of light remains constant and independent of direction.
I asked Gemini. does light travel west faster than it does east?
No, the speed of light in a vacuum is constant regardless of the direction it travels, whether west, east, or any other direction. This is a fundamental principle of physics established by the theory of special relativity.
There might be some confusion due to the Sagnac effect, which is a phenomenon observed in rotating reference frames. It predicts a minuscule difference in the travel time of light depending on its direction relative to the rotation.
However, this effect is incredibly small and only significant in very precise measurements with extremely sensitive equipment.
For all practical purposes and everyday situations, the speed of light remains constant and independent of direction.
Quote from: GeminiFor all practical purposes and everyday situations, the speed of light remains constant and independent of direction.
So usage of the effect in airplanes doesn't constitute a practical purpose, according to Gemini.
Many tens of thousands of RLGs are operating in inertial navigation systems and have established high accuracy, with better than 0.01?/hour bias uncertainty, and mean time between failures in excess of 60,000 hours.
Ring laser gyroscope. From Wikipedia: QuoteMany tens of thousands of RLGs are operating in inertial navigation systems and have established high accuracy, with better than 0.01?/hour bias uncertainty, and mean time between failures in excess of 60,000 hours.
Depends on what you mean by speed of light! The RLG works on the basis that the time taken for a photon to get from A back to A via a circular path depends on whether the path itself is rotating.
But the important point here is that, as usual, a chatbot is promulgating a transparent untruth.
Quote from: alancalverd on 02/03/2024 11:39:39But the important point here is that, as usual, a chatbot is promulgating a transparent untruth.What's usual now may no longer be usual later on.
from: alancalverd on 02/03/2024 11:39:39But the important point here is that, as usual, a chatbot is promulgating a transparent untruth.
Quote from: Halc on 22/02/2024 20:37:50I'm glad you found one you like. No video is tagged with that name, but I'm guessing the one in post 184.This one, I added his name in the post. Quote from: hamdani yusuf on 04/02/2024 08:18:02//www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsMqCHCV5XcWhy twin's paradox is NOT about acceleration?QuoteChapters: 00:00 What is the twin's paradox?00:48 Why acceleration doesn't solve twin's paradox2:24 Twin's paradox without acceleration (Earth's frame)4:42 The traveling frame7:13 My new website - floatheadphysics (ad)8:48 Earth's frame again - with the flag11:38 Travelling frame again - with the flag13:30 The resolution! 14:45 Relativity of simultaneity17:02 Isn't the root cause the acceleration?18:20 What do they 'see'? In this video, we'll intuitively resolve the twin's paradox. This version of the twin's paradox involves no acceleration. And no, you don't need equivalence principle, and you don't need general relativity to solve it. Twin's paradox can be completely solved using special theory of relativity and the correct usage of relativity of simultaneity. Let's see if anyone has objection to the explanation given in this video, which is an improvement of previous video by the same author, Mahesh Shenoy from Floatheadphysics. It should show my intention to learn, but somehow you can't see it. On the other hand, if you are already convinced that your current explanation is the correct one, and the others are wrong, you won't be able to learn.
I'm glad you found one you like. No video is tagged with that name, but I'm guessing the one in post 184.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsMqCHCV5XcWhy twin's paradox is NOT about acceleration?QuoteChapters: 00:00 What is the twin's paradox?00:48 Why acceleration doesn't solve twin's paradox2:24 Twin's paradox without acceleration (Earth's frame)4:42 The traveling frame7:13 My new website - floatheadphysics (ad)8:48 Earth's frame again - with the flag11:38 Travelling frame again - with the flag13:30 The resolution! 14:45 Relativity of simultaneity17:02 Isn't the root cause the acceleration?18:20 What do they 'see'? In this video, we'll intuitively resolve the twin's paradox. This version of the twin's paradox involves no acceleration. And no, you don't need equivalence principle, and you don't need general relativity to solve it. Twin's paradox can be completely solved using special theory of relativity and the correct usage of relativity of simultaneity. Let's see if anyone has objection to the explanation given in this video, which is an improvement of previous video by the same author, Mahesh Shenoy from Floatheadphysics.
Chapters: 00:00 What is the twin's paradox?00:48 Why acceleration doesn't solve twin's paradox2:24 Twin's paradox without acceleration (Earth's frame)4:42 The traveling frame7:13 My new website - floatheadphysics (ad)8:48 Earth's frame again - with the flag11:38 Travelling frame again - with the flag13:30 The resolution! 14:45 Relativity of simultaneity17:02 Isn't the root cause the acceleration?18:20 What do they 'see'? In this video, we'll intuitively resolve the twin's paradox. This version of the twin's paradox involves no acceleration. And no, you don't need equivalence principle, and you don't need general relativity to solve it. Twin's paradox can be completely solved using special theory of relativity and the correct usage of relativity of simultaneity.
What if there is another twin travel to the opposite direction with the same speed? And another one in perpendicular direction?
As a 60 year old physicist, I can say that this is the best demonstration of the twin's paradox I have seen, and I saw the first one when I was 15. I also love your enthusiasm. Bravo!
This is by far the best explanation for the twin paradox I?ve seen, and I have watched a lot of YouTube videos on this spanning close to a decade. This holds true for basically all of your videos. Thank you!!
Superb - I am a professor of geometry, and I never saw such a good explanation without drawing a space-time diagram.
Great video. Simultaneity in relativity is often overlooked. Nice explanation of why you can't ignore it. And it was great to highlight that what you measure using scientific apparatus, clocks, rulers etc is not the same thing as what you a see using your eyes or cameras. Nice.
That was such a good experience. I'm simultaneously Happy, impressed, dazzled, and awakened. I understand others comparing this to other explanations, but I want to say this is the first time it's ever really been explained. Your approach of having a conversation and asking all those questions is so incredibly effective. Thank you so much. Special relativity is itself an amazing leap of imagination. And then on top of that solving the paradoxes are a bunch of other giant leaps.
. And it was great to highlight that what you measure using scientific apparatus, clocks, rulers etc is not the same thing as what you a see using your eyes or cameras.