Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Idiot. "Strictly regular synchronised heartbeats" is meaningless once
the twins are no longer local to each other. There is no way to
perform the measurement, even (especially) in principle. Learn what a
clock is (it isn't Galileo's heart).

Don't you even suspect that cumulatively more than 100,000 physics
grad students and their teachers have pondered this primitive point
and reached some sort of satisfactory conclusion? GET YOUR LAZY ASS
IN GEAR AND FIND IT. You are missing the big picture. You haven't
even expended the minimal effort to learn it is called the Twin
Paradox.

One twin travels relativistically, one twin stays at home. When they
reunite the traveling twin is seen to have aged much less than his
genetic double.

Acceleration breaks the symmetry of who ages faster. To accomplish
that, the acceleration can occur before the clocks (or the twins)
exist. Only reference frames matter.

Inertial frames with relative *velocities* pursue different paths
through spacetime in Special Relativity. No clock anomaly is apparent
in any of them until clocks are compared (by all being local when you
do it, initial calibration then experiment). Acceleration is
irrelevant in SR to the running of the clocks (as opposed to
Equivalence Principle acceleration in GR). Acceleration is necessary
at some arbitrary time not associated with the experiment itself for
breaking the symmetry of clock observation. Acceleration defines
which reference frame takes what path through spacetime - even if it
occurs when the clocks are *off* (or not even constructed yet, or
destroyed) - so the situation is NOT symmetric. There is a difference
between the reference frame and any clocks in it.

1) Acceleration is an absolute measurement and it does not require a
clock to make the measurement (e.g, simultaneous displacement of three
independent orthogonally cantilevered masses). There is no doubt who
was accelerated even if a clock was not running/existing during
aceleration. Any past accelerated reference frame has a different
mixture of space and time from an unaccelerated frame.

2) Past acceleration is irrelevant to the running of present clocks,
but not to the mixture of space and time in the reference frame that
said clocks measure. This is an important subtlety and the key to the
whole thing. You cannot synchronize clocks except by having them
local. That's what Relativity demands. If they are local at the
start, you can tell who was naughty thereafter without needing a clock
to do the acceleration measurement. Accelerometers are not clocks.

EXAMPLE: We have three identical clocks that are off (a state of not
running, or of not even having been fabricated) and zeroed. Each
clock has/will have a very short toggle jiggger switch sticking out.
We load them (or their parts, or ore and a smelter and a machine shop)
in individual spaceships and set up the experiment.

CLOCK 1: That's our clock. It sits stationary in our inertial
reference frame with a little jigger sticking out. Touch the jigger
and the "off" state becomes "on" or the "on" state becomes "off."
Clock 1 is "off." Or we can build it from parts just before we need
it, and in the "off" state, zeroed.

CLOCK 2: In a spaceship traveling at 0.999c relative to our inertial
frame of reference. Clock 2 is "off." It was built after all
acceleration ceased, and set to zero. It skims past Clock 1 (our
clock), the jiggers touch, both Clocks 1 and 2 are now "on" and
locally synchronized by touching. Elapsed time accumulates in each
one. The situation is NOT symmetric! We have an accelerometer and
they have an acelerometer. We know who accelerated to set up the
experiment even if there wasn't a clock present when it happened.

CLOCK 3: In a spaceship traveling at 0.999c relative to our inertial
frame of reference, but 180 degrees counter in direction to Clock 2.
Clock 3 is zeroed and "off." It was built after all acceleration
ceased, and set to zero.

Some arbitrary time after Clocks 1 and 2 synchronize and turn "on" by
touching, Clocks 2 and 3 brush past each other, touching jiggers.
Clock 2 is now "off," Clock 3 is now "on." Write down the elapsed
time in now "off" Clock 2, then smash the clock with a sledgehammer.
Or melt it down, or toss it over the side. The spaceship with Clock 3
is returning back over the path taken by the spaceship with Clock 2.

CLOCK 1: That's our clock. It sits stationary in our inertial
reference frame with a little jigger sticking out. Clock 3 rushes
past, jiggers touch. Clocks 3 and 1 are now off. All clocks are
off. No clock has accelerated while "on" or even while existing.
Write down elapsed times, smash each clock with a sledgehammer. Or
melt them down, or toss them.

BOTTOM LINE: Get all three slips of paper together... Accelerate as
you need. Or send all the results to all three folks by radio and
never decelerate. All clocks have been smashed, melted, tossed.
Their elapsed times were written down. The numbers on the papers
won't change when you accelerate or broadcast the data.

Acceleration is arguably General Relativity, as we did setting up the
experiment. It is irrelevant to the clocks. No clock is running or
even exists during acceleration. Numbers written on slips of paper
are unaffected by Special or General Relativity. One could as easily
build the clocks from their component parts after setting up the
experiment. No clock exists during acceleration up or down. The
*reference frame* has accelerated in the past, and that changes its
mix of space and time relative to an unaccelerated frame. The clocks
are passive observers in a presently unaccelerated setting.

Finally.... compare elapsed times. Elapsed time #2=#3 (straight line
motion for both traveling clocks, no acceleration!), but elapsed time
#2+#3 does not equal #1, the local stationary reference frame
summation. The sum of #2+#3 elasped time is only about 4.5% that than
of #1's accumulated elapsed time. You have the Twin Paradox (or,
Triplets) without any running clock having been accelerated - or
having even existed during acceleration up or down.



--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!

Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

Don't be stoooopid Greenfield..


The Twin Paradox: The Spacetime Diagram Explanation
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...spacetime.html
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.a...n_paradox.html

Critical Thinking
http://www.csicop.org/si/9012/critical-thinking.html

Tuning Up Your Crank Filters
Skeptical Briefs "Reality Check" June, 2001
http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/Briefs/Cranks.html

Uncle Al wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Idiot. "Strictly regular synchronised heartbeats" is meaningless once
the twins are no longer local to each other. There is no way to
perform the measurement, even (especially) in principle. Learn what a
clock is (it isn't Galileo's heart).

Idiot! Who mentioned your clocks? This is THE POINT, that time,
velocity, and anything seen or unseen, which exists, can do so WITHOUT
clocks. Reality is STILL THERE for the blind

Don't you even suspect that cumulatively more than 100,000 physics
grad students and their teachers have pondered this primitive point
and reached some sort of satisfactory conclusion? GET YOUR LAZY ASS
IN GEAR AND FIND IT. You are missing the big picture. You haven't
even expended the minimal effort to learn it is called the Twin
Paradox.

And do all these physics grads agree that the moon is aging faster
than the earth, because the earth stays at home, while the moon
travels around in space?

One twin travels relativistically, one twin stays at home. When they
reunite the traveling twin is seen to have aged much less than his
genetic double.

They didn't 'measure time'- they just counted!
Do you think that the frequency of events (heart beats) increases just
because you move? Does a spinning top accellerate its rotation, just
because it moves away from earth?

Acceleration breaks the symmetry of who ages faster. To accomplish
that, the acceleration can occur before the clocks (or the twins)
exist. Only reference frames matter.

Age is synonomous with time. You claim that Bill's heart beat more
times than Ben's , just because he went away, and I say to that, and
all the under BS which I have seen on these posts 100 'times'
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Jim G

Sam Wormley wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

Don't be stoooopid Greenfield..


The Twin Paradox: The Spacetime Diagram Explanation
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...spacetime.html
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.a...n_paradox.html

Critical Thinking
http://www.csicop.org/si/9012/critical-thinking.html

Tuning Up Your Crank Filters
Skeptical Briefs "Reality Check" June, 2001
http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/Briefs/Cranks.html

Links:
"How to use RAM to regurgitate Relativity arguement"
"Logical thought processes for Establishment Physics"

Whoops! Definitely not applicable here!

Jim G

Jim Greenfield wrote:

Sam Wormley wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

Don't be stoooopid Greenfield..


The Twin Paradox: The Spacetime Diagram Explanation
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...spacetime.html
http://hermes.physics.adelaide.edu.a...n_paradox.html

Critical Thinking
http://www.csicop.org/si/9012/critical-thinking.html

Tuning Up Your Crank Filters
Skeptical Briefs "Reality Check" June, 2001
http://spot.colorado.edu/~vstenger/Briefs/Cranks.html

Links:
"How to use RAM to regurgitate Relativity arguement"
"Logical thought processes for Establishment Physics"

Whoops! Definitely not applicable here!

Jim G

Not "Establishment Physics", Greenfield, but reproducible
empirical data. Do you understand the difference?

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...
Uncle Al wrote in message
...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Idiot. "Strictly regular synchronised heartbeats" is meaningless once
the twins are no longer local to each other. There is no way to
perform the measurement, even (especially) in principle. Learn what a
clock is (it isn't Galileo's heart).

Idiot! Who mentioned your clocks? This is THE POINT, that time,
velocity, and anything seen or unseen, which exists, can do so WITHOUT
clocks. Reality is STILL THERE for the blind
------------------------8

IANAMQPBIHRUORAFITBSAE, but -
You talk about SR, then present an example that requires acceleration (you
can't leave or return without acceleration). Al's example doesn't require
acceleration. Replace the clocks with locally compared (calibrated) and
very long lived triplets, two of whom are then sent off in their craft ready
to start, and then stick their peepees out the side of the craft and start
counting pulses when they touch on the way past each other.

The result will be the same as with the clocks, assuming touching peepees
doesn't quicken anyones pulse.

(Jim Greenfield) wrote in message . com...
Uncle Al wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Idiot. "Strictly regular synchronised heartbeats" is meaningless once
the twins are no longer local to each other. There is no way to
perform the measurement, even (especially) in principle. Learn what a
clock is (it isn't Galileo's heart).

Idiot! Who mentioned your clocks? This is THE POINT, that time,
velocity, and anything seen or unseen, which exists, can do so WITHOUT
clocks. Reality is STILL THERE for the blind

What is a clock supposed to have to do with vision?

They didn't 'measure time'- they just counted!

What do you think "measuring time" is?

Hint: Counting periodic events. They measured time.

Do you think that the frequency of events (heart beats) increases just
because you move?

The relative timing of events in different frames changes
because you move. I think this, most people in this newsgroup
think this. The reason we think this is that it has been
experimentally verified.

Does a spinning top accellerate its rotation, just
because it moves away from earth?

The timing of periodic events associated with that
spinning top will change depending on its path,
velocity, acceleration, and gravitational field experienced.

We know this because we measure it.

Age is synonomous with time. You claim that Bill's heart beat more
times than Ben's , just because he went away, and I say to that, and
all the under BS which I have seen on these posts 100 'times'
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I know. But experiment says otherwise. Mother Nature
trumps your intuition.

- Randy

In sci.physics, Jim Greenfield

wrote
on 17 Nov 2003 05:01:06 -0800
:
Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

How blind do these twins have to be?

Muons are far more reliable and show signs that speed (relative
to the detectors) is a factor in observed muon decay.
However, I'd have to find the details.

No space travel needed, just a little workout in an accelerator... :-)

--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.

In article ,
Jim Greenfield wrote:
Cape Canaveral:
31/11/03

In order to test SR, and the "Twins Paradox", identical totally
blind twins Bill and Ben have been subjects of a highly secret NASA
project to test these hypothesis.
Having been thoroughly checked to see that they maintained strictly
regular synchronised heartbeats, and were of even and unexcitable
temperament, Bill was sent into space on a long, fast journey, while
Ben remained on the base. Just before his departure, both began to
count their heart beats simultaneously. On Bill's return, they
compared their counts. Ben had counted x beats, and Bill????????

Jim G

The usual, with "heartbeats" substituted for "ticks of the clock".


--
"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, then perhaps we shall find the
truth... But let us beware of publishing our dreams before they have been
put to the proof by the waking understanding." -- Friedrich August Kekulé