Science > Physics > Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Dufus" |
| Date: |
25 Apr 2007 10:54:13 AM |
| Object: |
Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:43:38 +0930, Surfer
<surfer@no.spam.net> wrote:
BATON ROUGE – Subhash Kak, Delaune Distinguished Professor of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at LSU, recently resolved the twin
paradox, known as one of the most enduring puzzles of modern-day
physics.
First suggested by Albert Einstein more than 100 years ago, the
paradox deals with the effects of time in the context of travel at
near the speed of light. Einstein originally used the example of two
clocks – one motionless, one in transit. He stated that, due to the
laws of physics, clocks being transported near the speed of light
would move more slowly than clocks that remained stationary. In more
recent times, the paradox has been described using the analogy of
twins. If one twin is placed on a space shuttle and travels near the
speed of light while the remaining twin remains earthbound, the
unmoved twin would have aged dramatically compared to his interstellar
sibling, according to the paradox.
“If the twin aboard the spaceship went to the nearest star, which is
4.45 light years away at 86 percent of the speed of light, when he
returned, he would have aged 5 years. But the earthbound twin would
have aged more than 10 years!” said Kak.
The fact that time slows down on moving objects has been documented
and verified over the years through repeated experimentation. But, in
the previous scenario, the paradox is that the earthbound twin is the
one who would be considered to be in motion – in relation to the
sibling – and therefore should be the one aging more slowly. Einstein
and other scientists have attempted to resolve this problem before,
but none of the formulas they presented proved satisfactory.
Kak is an academic fraud.... as everyone knows the "Twins
scenario" is NOT SYMMETRICAL because the twin who has to
turn around will suffer an ACCELERATION while the one who is
"motionless" WILL NOT... in fact "lack of acceleration" is
the DEFINITION OF "MOTIONLESS" in Special Relativity and in
the Twins case one of the twins is ACCELERATED and the other
is not... so they are NOT IDENTICAL no matter how you
arrange it!
The so called "Twins Paradox" is NOT a paradox because
of the DIFFERENCE IN ACCELERATION of the two twins and this
has been KNOWN for a century and has been well understood
for a century.
Kak should go back to the skilled trades where he
belongs... he's another academic bozo and a tedious fraud.
Kak’s findings were published online in the International Journal of
Theoretical Science, and will appear in the upcoming print version of
the publication. “I solved the paradox by incorporating a new
principle within the relativity framework that defines motion not in
relation to individual objects, such as the two twins with respect to
each other, but in relation to distant stars,” said Kak.
Total horse ptukie.... "non-inertial motion" is DEFINED
as the "existence of acceleration" (which is easily detected
because it causes a "force" to appear. One of the Twins
will feel a "force" when his rocket ship turns around...
while the other Twin will NOT feel any such force....
therefore the two Twins are NOT IDENTICAL physically!
Using
probabilistic relationships, Kak’s solution assumes that the universe
has the same general properties no matter where one might be within
it.
The implications of this resolution will be widespread, generally
enhancing the scientific community’s comprehension of relativity. It
may eventually even have some impact on quantum communications and
computers, potentially making it possible to design more efficient and
reliable communication systems for space applications.
For more information, please contact Subhash Kak at 225-578-5552 or
kak@ece.lsu.edu.
###
Contact: Ashley Berthelot
LSU Media Relations
225-578-3870
aberth4@lsu.edu
More news and information can be found on LSU’s home page at
www.lsu.edu.
Complete amateur incompetent hogwash.....
.
|
|
| User: "Pentcho Valev" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
26 Apr 2007 03:38:55 AM |
|
|
Dufus wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:43:38 +0930, Surfer
<surfer@no.spam.net> wrote:
BATON ROUGE - Subhash Kak, Delaune Distinguished Professor of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at LSU, recently resolved the twin
paradox, known as one of the most enduring puzzles of modern-day
physics.
First suggested by Albert Einstein more than 100 years ago, the
paradox deals with the effects of time in the context of travel at
near the speed of light. Einstein originally used the example of two
clocks - one motionless, one in transit. He stated that, due to the
laws of physics, clocks being transported near the speed of light
would move more slowly than clocks that remained stationary. In more
recent times, the paradox has been described using the analogy of
twins. If one twin is placed on a space shuttle and travels near the
speed of light while the remaining twin remains earthbound, the
unmoved twin would have aged dramatically compared to his interstellar
sibling, according to the paradox.
"If the twin aboard the spaceship went to the nearest star, which is
4.45 light years away at 86 percent of the speed of light, when he
returned, he would have aged 5 years. But the earthbound twin would
have aged more than 10 years!" said Kak.
The fact that time slows down on moving objects has been documented
and verified over the years through repeated experimentation. But, in
the previous scenario, the paradox is that the earthbound twin is the
one who would be considered to be in motion - in relation to the
sibling - and therefore should be the one aging more slowly. Einstein
and other scientists have attempted to resolve this problem before,
but none of the formulas they presented proved satisfactory.
Kak is an academic fraud.... as everyone knows the "Twins
scenario" is NOT SYMMETRICAL because the twin who has to
turn around will suffer an ACCELERATION while the one who is
"motionless" WILL NOT... in fact "lack of acceleration" is
the DEFINITION OF "MOTIONLESS" in Special Relativity and in
the Twins case one of the twins is ACCELERATED and the other
is not... so they are NOT IDENTICAL no matter how you
arrange it!
The so called "Twins Paradox" is NOT a paradox because
of the DIFFERENCE IN ACCELERATION of the two twins and this
has been KNOWN for a century and has been well understood
for a century.
Don't repeat BECAUSE ACCELERATION so often. Someone has hypnotized
you. If necessary, relativity hypnotists will hypnotize you
differently and then you will constantly repeat EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF
ACCELERATION:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/efd17e6184872b8a/00c60b2771050adc#00c60b2771050adc
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
| User: "H. Wabnig .... .-- .- -... -. .. --. @ .- --- -. DOT .- -" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
26 Apr 2007 03:58:49 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2007 01:38:55 -0700, Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dufus wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:43:38 +0930, Surfer
<surfer@no.spam.net> wrote:
BATON ROUGE - Subhash Kak, Delaune Distinguished Professor of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at LSU, recently resolved the twin
paradox, known as one of the most enduring puzzles of modern-day
physics.
First suggested by Albert Einstein more than 100 years ago, the
paradox deals with the effects of time in the context of travel at
near the speed of light. Einstein originally used the example of two
clocks - one motionless, one in transit. He stated that, due to the
laws of physics, clocks being transported near the speed of light
would move more slowly than clocks that remained stationary. In more
recent times, the paradox has been described using the analogy of
twins. If one twin is placed on a space shuttle and travels near the
speed of light while the remaining twin remains earthbound, the
unmoved twin would have aged dramatically compared to his interstellar
sibling, according to the paradox.
"If the twin aboard the spaceship went to the nearest star, which is
4.45 light years away at 86 percent of the speed of light, when he
returned, he would have aged 5 years. But the earthbound twin would
have aged more than 10 years!" said Kak.
The fact that time slows down on moving objects has been documented
and verified over the years through repeated experimentation. But, in
the previous scenario, the paradox is that the earthbound twin is the
one who would be considered to be in motion - in relation to the
sibling - and therefore should be the one aging more slowly. Einstein
and other scientists have attempted to resolve this problem before,
but none of the formulas they presented proved satisfactory.
Kak is an academic fraud.... as everyone knows the "Twins
scenario" is NOT SYMMETRICAL because the twin who has to
turn around will suffer an ACCELERATION while the one who is
"motionless" WILL NOT... in fact "lack of acceleration" is
the DEFINITION OF "MOTIONLESS" in Special Relativity and in
the Twins case one of the twins is ACCELERATED and the other
is not... so they are NOT IDENTICAL no matter how you
arrange it!
The so called "Twins Paradox" is NOT a paradox because
of the DIFFERENCE IN ACCELERATION of the two twins and this
has been KNOWN for a century and has been well understood
for a century.
Don't repeat BECAUSE ACCELERATION so often. Someone has hypnotized
you. If necessary, relativity hypnotists will hypnotize you
differently and then you will constantly repeat EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF
ACCELERATION:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/browse_frm/thread/efd17e6184872b8a/00c60b2771050adc#00c60b2771050adc
Pentcho Valev
hi Pentcho,
did you see Shubees explanation, and what is it you don't understand?
On Mar 10, 11:43 pm, "Pentcho Valev" <pva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Is acceleration the cause of the greater youthfulness of the
travelling twin?
The flaw is in asking what causes time dilation and then expecting the
answer in a few meaningless words. Blame geometry. Time dilation is
nothing more than an obvious property of the spacetime geometry of
Minkowski. The answer is entirely mathematical and every feature of
Minkowski spacetime is inescapably clear. That's just the way it is.
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf
w.
--
Thanks God that I am an Atheist.
Gottseidank bin ich Atheist.
(G.B.Shaw)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alen" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
26 Apr 2007 09:46:21 AM |
|
|
On Apr 26, 1:54 am, Dufus <b...@alabama.com> wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:43:38 +0930, Surfer
<sur...@no.spam.net> wrote:
BATON ROUGE - Subhash Kak, Delaune Distinguished Professor of
Electrical and Computer Engineering at LSU, recently resolved the twin
paradox, known as one of the most enduring puzzles of modern-day
physics.
First suggested by Albert Einstein more than 100 years ago, the
paradox deals with the effects of time in the context of travel at
near the speed of light. Einstein originally used the example of two
clocks - one motionless, one in transit. He stated that, due to the
laws of physics, clocks being transported near the speed of light
would move more slowly than clocks that remained stationary. In more
recent times, the paradox has been described using the analogy of
twins. If one twin is placed on a space shuttle and travels near the
speed of light while the remaining twin remains earthbound, the
unmoved twin would have aged dramatically compared to his interstellar
sibling, according to the paradox.
"If the twin aboard the spaceship went to the nearest star, which is
4.45 light years away at 86 percent of the speed of light, when he
returned, he would have aged 5 years. But the earthbound twin would
have aged more than 10 years!" said Kak.
The fact that time slows down on moving objects has been documented
and verified over the years through repeated experimentation. But, in
the previous scenario, the paradox is that the earthbound twin is the
one who would be considered to be in motion - in relation to the
sibling - and therefore should be the one aging more slowly. Einstein
and other scientists have attempted to resolve this problem before,
but none of the formulas they presented proved satisfactory.
Kak is an academic fraud.... as everyone knows the "Twins
scenario" is NOT SYMMETRICAL because the twin who has to
turn around will suffer an ACCELERATION while the one who is
"motionless" WILL NOT... in fact "lack of acceleration" is
the DEFINITION OF "MOTIONLESS" in Special Relativity and in
the Twins case one of the twins is ACCELERATED and the other
is not... so they are NOT IDENTICAL no matter how you
arrange it!
The so called "Twins Paradox" is NOT a paradox because
of the DIFFERENCE IN ACCELERATION of the two twins and this
has been KNOWN for a century and has been well understood
for a century.
Yes - it is not symmetrical - so why is this called the 'twins'
paradox? 'Twins' suggests they are identical. The following is
therefore the real twins paradox:
Two identical ships are in the same inertial frame, far apart
in deep space. They both briefly accelerate, by an identical
process, directly towards one another. When they meet head
on, and stop one another, each will claim the other should be
younger.
Alen
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Surfer" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
25 Apr 2007 10:33:49 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:54:13 GMT, Dufus <bama@alabama.com> wrote:
Kak is an academic fraud.... as everyone knows the "Twins
scenario" is NOT SYMMETRICAL because the twin who has to
turn around will suffer an ACCELERATION while the one who is
"motionless" WILL NOT... in fact "lack of acceleration" is
the DEFINITION OF "MOTIONLESS" in Special Relativity and in
the Twins case one of the twins is ACCELERATED and the other
is not... so they are NOT IDENTICAL no matter how you
arrange it!
However, the slowing down of all clocks and processes – including
atomic vibrations on the traveling twin cannot be laid on the periods
of acceleration and turning around during the journey, since they can,
in principle, be made as small as one desires.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
26 Apr 2007 02:18:24 AM |
|
|
There is no true paradox !
All matter is constantly on the move within the open environment of
Space-Time. Just as Space is an open
environment in which one may move across, so is the dimension of time,
hence the environment being called Space-Time.
See
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/forum_againstum.htm
for brief description.
Due to the measurements instruments, clocks and ruler, being affected
by what direction one travels across
Space-Time, one can not determine what actual direction one is
traveling across that Space-Time without performing comparisons.
Therefore, lets say that earth was in motion across space at a high
velocity and that a rocket left the planet in the opposite direction
of travel and then eventually returned, this would result with the
twin on earth aging less than the twin on the rocket. In short it all
depends on what the spatial velocity each object has, meaning the
spatial velocity of both earth and the rocket. This means that the
spatial velocity of the supposed " stationary " reference point must
be taken into account.
Unfortunately, this can only be a relative comparison if only one test
is performed.
Therefore it would be best to send four rockets away from and back to
earth in a pyramid like direction pattern, and then compare all clock
measures to determine the direction across Space-Time of which the
reference point, earth, is moving.
However, if one chooses to remain motionless in intellectual growth,
and accept Relativity as the one and only that is not be surpassed,
then one will continue to practice circular arguments that are
supported by an incomplete theory.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: LSU professor resolves Einstein's twin paradox |
26 Apr 2007 02:42:53 AM |
|
|
There is no true paradox !
All matter is constantly on the move within the open environment of
Space-Time. Just as Space is an open environment in which one may
move across, so is the dimension of time, hence the environment being
called Space-Time.
See
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/forum_againstum.htm
for brief description.
Due to the measurements instruments, clocks and ruler, being affected
by what direction one travels across Space-Time, one can not determine
what actual direction one is traveling across that Space-Time without
performing comparisons.
Therefore, lets say that earth was in motion across space at a high
velocity and that a rocket left the planet in the opposite direction
of travel and then eventually returned, this would result with the
twin on earth aging less than the twin on the rocket. In short it all
depends on what the spatial velocity each object has, meaning the
spatial velocity of both earth and the rocket. This means that the
spatial velocity of the supposed " stationary " reference point must
be taken into account.
Unfortunately, this can only be a relative comparison if only one test
is performed.
Therefore it would be best to send four rockets away from and back to
earth in a pyramid like direction pattern, and then compare all clock
measures to determine the direction across Space-Time of which the
reference point, earth, is moving.
However, if one chooses to remain motionless in intellectual growth,
and accept Relativity as the one and only that is not be surpassed,
then one will continue to practice circular arguments that are
supported by an incomplete theory.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
