0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: MikeFontenot on 04/08/2019 17:11:43The MCMIFM (the Momentarily Co-Moving Inertial Frame Montage) is the uniquely true and meaningful reference frame for the accelerating observer,Problem is, it isn't a meaningful reference frame for anything else. It is a sort of idealistic reference frame.
The MCMIFM (the Momentarily Co-Moving Inertial Frame Montage) is the uniquely true and meaningful reference frame for the accelerating observer,
Quote from: MikeFontenot on 04/08/2019 19:02:23Quote from: HalcProblem is, it isn't a meaningful reference frame for anything else. It is a sort of idealistic reference frame.It's not intended for anyone other than the accelerating observer. For HIM, it tells him everything he wants to know.Quote[...]It does me no good for instance to picture the Andromedons going massively back and forth in time each day.The whole point of the Penrose's Andromeda "Paradox" is that if I'm accelerating back-and-forth, I will conclude that the Andromedons are alternately getting older and younger, for each circuit I make. One minute, I might fear that they are planning an attack on us, and the next minute I might fear that they are already enroute and almost here.
Quote from: HalcProblem is, it isn't a meaningful reference frame for anything else. It is a sort of idealistic reference frame.It's not intended for anyone other than the accelerating observer. For HIM, it tells him everything he wants to know.Quote[...]It does me no good for instance to picture the Andromedons going massively back and forth in time each day.The whole point of the Penrose's Andromeda "Paradox" is that if I'm accelerating back-and-forth, I will conclude that the Andromedons are alternately getting older and younger, for each circuit I make. One minute, I might fear that they are planning an attack on us, and the next minute I might fear that they are already enroute and almost here.
Problem is, it isn't a meaningful reference frame for anything else. It is a sort of idealistic reference frame.
[...]It does me no good for instance to picture the Andromedons going massively back and forth in time each day.
Quote from: MikeFontenot on 04/08/2019 22:38:43The whole point of the Penrose's Andromeda "Paradox" is that if I'm accelerating back-and-forth, I will conclude that the Andromedons are alternately getting older and younger, for each circuit I make.I conclude no such thing, since doing so would violate physics.
The whole point of the Penrose's Andromeda "Paradox" is that if I'm accelerating back-and-forth, I will conclude that the Andromedons are alternately getting older and younger, for each circuit I make.
Roger Penrose, Brian Greene, and probably many other well-known physicists disagree with you.
If you've never seen Brian Greene's short video clip from his PBS NOVA show several years ago, here's the link to it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYZQxMowBswScan to the 6:00 minute point for his extremely distant alien example. It's only a couple of minutes long.
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/a-critique-of-mike-fontenots-cado-scheme.490163/ I’ve not had time to read this, but it dates back to the “better days" of PF, so there might be some interesting discussion here.
You seemed to suggest otherwise when you said that you conclude that the Andromedons are alternately getting older and younger, but perhaps I misunderstand what you're asserting.
Quote from: MikeFontenot on 05/08/2019 15:49:17Our conclusions agree with what we can observe and EMPIRICALLY computeAn empirical computation. New term to me. I think I know what you mean by it.
Our conclusions agree with what we can observe and EMPIRICALLY compute
The traveler is making elementary observations, combined with first-principles calculations, to determine the current age of the distant person. So his empirical observations and first-principles calculations are unquestionably true if those calculations are done correctly.
[...]
Quote from: Halc on 06/08/2019 22:30:17[...]
An arbitrarily large number of observers could be momentarily co-located with our particular traveler when he concludes that his home twin has a particular age at that instant. And the velocities of those other observers wrt the home twin could cover velocities arbitrarily close to plus c and to minus c.
So, at that one instant, essentially all possible ages of the home twin could simultaneously exist. That supports the block universe view.
But in our real universe, it's possible for a traveler to travel large distances through our the real universe, never getting close enough to any large masses to cause the difference between special relativity's results and general relativity's results to be significant.
Quote from: MikeFontenot on 08/08/2019 16:19:21An arbitrarily large number of observers could be momentarily co-located with our particular traveler when he concludes that his home twin has a particular age at that instant.And in fact those observers are not needed at all since anybody, including those not co-located with the traveler at that event, can work out the age of the distant twin simultaneous with that event, relative to all the various frames.
An arbitrarily large number of observers could be momentarily co-located with our particular traveler when he concludes that his home twin has a particular age at that instant.
Calling all these co-located alternatives 'observers' is misleading since if any of them can actually see the twin 'back home', they'd all see that twin with the exact same time on his watch.