How do you solve the twins Paradox? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar...
Is it a good idea to use CNN to classify 1D signal?
Why wasn't DOSKEY integrated with COMMAND.COM?
How were pictures turned from film to a big picture in a picture frame before digital scanning?
A term for a woman complaining about things/begging in a cute/childish way
Did Deadpool rescue all of the X-Force?
How do I find out the mythology and history of my Fortress?
What is the meaning of 'breadth' in breadth first search?
How could we fake a moon landing now?
Why does the remaining Rebel fleet at the end of Rogue One seem dramatically larger than the one in A New Hope?
What is this clumpy 20-30cm high yellow-flowered plant?
Why are the trig functions versine, haversine, exsecant, etc, rarely used in modern mathematics?
Is it possible for SQL statements to execute concurrently within a single session in SQL Server?
How do I use the new nonlinear finite element in Mathematica 12 for this equation?
Do any jurisdictions seriously consider reclassifying social media websites as publishers?
Is there any word for a place full of confusion?
Why should I vote and accept answers?
How to play a character with a disability or mental disorder without being offensive?
Drawing without replacement: why is the order of draw irrelevant?
Question about debouncing - delay of state change
How to compare two different files line by line in unix?
Time to Settle Down!
What is the difference between globalisation and imperialism?
How would a mousetrap for use in space work?
Central Vacuuming: Is it worth it, and how does it compare to normal vacuuming?
How do you solve the twins Paradox?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)
2019 Moderator Election Q&A - Question CollectionWhat is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?Is time dilation an illusion? Variation on the twins paradoxTwin paradox caused by gravitational difference in spaceTwins paradox questionTheory of relativity paradox?Explanation for a much simpler version of the twin paradox?What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?The twin paradox in a universe with a torus topologyTwin Paradox on steroids - who would be older?The twin Paradox, What if they never meet and they are observed by an outside observer?How do we explain this new take on the old Twins Paradox?
$begingroup$
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
New contributor
$endgroup$
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
New contributor
$endgroup$
I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-
So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.
So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?
This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
special-relativity reference-frames acceleration
New contributor
New contributor
edited 2 hours ago
Qmechanic♦
108k122001249
108k122001249
New contributor
asked 3 hours ago
Roberto SingerRoberto Singer
82
82
New contributor
New contributor
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago
add a comment |
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "151"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Roberto Singer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473667%2fhow-do-you-solve-the-twins-paradox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
New contributor
$endgroup$
The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."
These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.
Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 3 hours ago
WillWill
1114
1114
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago
add a comment |
Roberto Singer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roberto Singer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roberto Singer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Roberto Singer is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f473667%2fhow-do-you-solve-the-twins-paradox%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
3
$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago