Twin story but without the planet ???

[Star-struck]

Originally posted by Intelligence

as stated above by jakiri particle are able to LIVE LONGER when TRAVELING FASTER.

 

NOW - You are thinking wow if I travel at C I could get some much more freaking stuff done!!!

 

WRONG.

 

Indeed you would live longer, but in fact it is found that one can only complete the SAME IDENTICAL amount of tasks which is in ratio to the increase of time.

 

In other words if you were going at such a speed that you would live twice as long......your mental processes, your physical movement, your perception extra would be HALF THE SPEED.

 

Further sealing the deal that to YOU nothing is changes. You cannot tell time is slower and you can't tell your processes are at a much lesser speed.

 

GOT IT? GET IT? GOOD.

 

Very intersting, thank you, that is what I was looking for.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by Star-struck

Wow, great, yay, you already stated that. Are you a glory-hound or what! Look, if you are too bothered that you have already stated it then feel free to abstain. I wouldn't want to put you out any further. I may continue to asks questions that you have already answered in the past, and quite frankly I'm getting tired of your pissiness.

 

Now, with regards to these particles who's lifespans are known and predictable, when they are moving with velocity are their lifespans lengthened or shortened in relation to their established lifespan?

 

I felt it was necessary to point out that you were asking a question that was answered in the post you were reply to.

 

The lifespans are lengthened relative to the detector's rest frame. (Guess what I'm going to say next.)

 

RELATIVITY ANNOUCEMENT!

[Star-struck]

So, could this observance be related to such things as muscle atrophy, and degradation of bone density in very inactive people? Could a general lack of movement limit lifespan whereas the opposite generally increases lifespan?

[JaKiri]

Are you trying to troll, or are you really that stupid?

[Star-struck]

I'm sorry that your life is such that you just can't seem to not be an asshole!

[Intelligence]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

Are you trying to troll, or are you really that stupid?

 

 

I think he's one of those kids in H.S. who kept asking questions over and over and had no idea how annoying they were.

 

Anyhow - the answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

 

It has 100% NOTHING TO WITH damned muscle.

 

Do the particle in a god dam particle accelerates hav MUSCLE???

 

Didn't think so man.....

[Star-struck]

Originally posted by Intelligence

 

 

I think he's one of those kids in H.S. who kept asking questions over and over and had no idea how annoying they were.

 

Anyhow - the answer is NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

 

It has 100% NOTHING TO WITH damned muscle.

 

Do the particle in a god dam particle accelerates hav MUSCLE???

 

Didn't think so man.....

 

No ass, muscles are comprised of particles.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by Star-struck

I'm sorry that your life is such that you just can't seem to not be an asshole!

 

Intel posted that the person travelling doesn't experience a time difference.

 

You replied to the post, therefore I assume you read it.

 

Hence, you're either deliberately getting things wrong and therefore trolling, or you didn't understand what he said despite it being in plain english and are therefore stupid.

 

ps.

 

Intel: Welcome aboard.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by Star-struck

 

No ass, muscles are comprised of particles.

 

They're all working in something very near to the same rest frame though. Do half the particles in your arm go whizzing off at a good fraction at the speed of light regularly?

[Intelligence]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

 

They're all working in something very near to the same rest frame though. Do half the particles in your arm go whizzing off at a good fraction at the speed of light regularly?

 

 

Apparently strucks typing muscle ARE INDEED whizzing out of control causing him to troll.

 

HAHAH! Thanks for the welcome Jakiri.

[Sayonara]

Why is none of this acid dripping into the Religion forum yet?

[JaKiri]

Quite a lot of it IS on relativity though

[uscphysics]

Just don't forget that when the twin leaves earth, the one in the ship is the only one in a state of velocity close to c. The person on earth is treated as remaining still. If you think of both moving with some v close to c, there are time dialations you have to take into effect for both twins, and not just the one. So if both of the twins travel away from each othe with the same v and return at the same v, they will be the same age when they meet again, but if one travels at a constant v > than the other, one should be older than the other,

[uscphysics]

Maybe I ought to clarify that some. You treat the earth as a the refernce frame to stay still. You could treat the guy in the rocket as staying still, but it would be harder to imagine the earth and the entire unvirse moving while the rocket stays still. (Well that could be argued, but I hope you know what I am getting at.)

[Kedas]

Originally posted by Star-struck

So, could this observance be related to such things as muscle atrophy, and degradation of bone density in very inactive people? Could a general lack of movement limit lifespan whereas the opposite generally increases lifespan?

 

although that the theory is also valid for small speeds the effects of it are only noticeable when the speed is close to light speed.

So you can discuss it but the differences are soooo smal it is really pointless.

probably smaller than a few microseconds over a whole lifetime.

 

Keep in mind that you talk about movement of a muscle relative to the rest of the body.

 

But maybe someone else can theorise what would happen if muscles could only move at half the light speed.

(we are not talking about reality then)

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by uscphysics

Maybe I ought to clarify that some. You treat the earth as a the refernce frame to stay still. You could treat the guy in the rocket as staying still, but it would be harder to imagine the earth and the entire unvirse moving while the rocket stays still. (Well that could be argued, but I hope you know what I am getting at.)

 

Special Relativity states that all reference frames are equally valid.

[Janus]

Okay, Let's see if I can shed some light on the subject.

 

First off, it is important to note what Relativity says about velocity and time.

 

When we say that time slows for an object that travels at near c, it is important to understand just what this means.

 

Relativity deals with measurements between reference frames. Thus one measures a time rate difference between himself and a frame that is moving with respect to him. If the Relative velocity remains constant, an observer in each frame will measure the other's time rate as slower.

 

Now here is the part that trips people up:

There is no way to say to choose either observer's measurements as reflecting reality better than the other's.

 

Both observer's measurement's equally reflect "reality".

 

Now how does one square this with the Twin paradox, where one twin returns younger than the other?

 

First we must understand how accleration effects measurements between frames of refernce.

 

Imagine a space ship accelerating through space. (the astronauts feel themselves pushed to the back of the ship due to this acceleration.)

 

There is a clock in the nose of the ship and one in the tail, and they are sending time signals to each other.

 

Because of the fact that light has a constant speed as measured by any observer, the clock in the nose will see the clock in the tail run slower,and the clock in the tail will measure the clock in the nose run faster. How much faster depends on the value of acceleration, and how far apart the clocks are separated. For any given accel, the longer the ship, the greater the time difference measured.

 

Now, this measurement of different time rates are not limited to items in the ship. If one were to look out from within the ship to a point somewhere up ahead, you would also see the same thing; clocks further ahead of you would run faster than clocks closer. ( and conversely, if you look behind you, clocks further away would run slower. )

 

Note that this effect is only measured by someone undergoing the acceleration. If you watched someone else accelerate in respect to you, the only time rate difference you would measure would be due to your relative velocity.

 

Now let's apply this to the Twin paradox. Twin A and B are sitting in spaceships at reart with each other.

 

Twin B fires his engines, accelerate up to near c, coasts for a while, brake to a stop, turns around and returns.

 

What Twin A measures:

 

Twin B increases relative speed wrt himself. As he does so, Twin B's time rate will slow down until he reaches coasting speed, then it runs slow at a constant rate.

 

He then coasts for say 10 ly, slows down, acclerates back towards Twin A, coasts again, then brakes to a stop next to Twin A. During both coasting periods Twin A will measure B's clock as running slow at a constant rate, and during the braking and turnaround, he will measure B's clock still running slow, but by a varying amount.

 

When Twin B returns, A will say that B will be younger because B's clock ran slow practically the whole time.

 

What B measures:

 

As the velocity between Twin A and himself increases, he will experience the feeling of being pulled to the back of his ship. He can attribute this to two possibilities, either he is accelerating away from Twin A, or A uniform gravitational field has come into existance, and because he is firing his engines, he is standing still, and because twin A isn't, he is falling.

 

In either case he will measure the following, Twin A's clock will run slow because of the combined effect of Increased velocity difference and the acceleration felt By B. both effects will increase as the velocity and distance increases.

 

The engines cut out and B coasts for a time. during this period, he will measure A clock as running slow at a constant rate. After traveling a distance (this distance depends on the relative velocity between A and B. I.E. if it is .866c, then due to length contraction, the 10ly measured by A will only measure 5ly for B)

 

B fires his engines again, though this time in the opposite direction. Thus twin A's position wrt the force felt will be opposite of it was before.

 

B's decreasing velocity wrt A will decrease the time slowing effect he measures. The fact that he is accelerating towards Twin A will cause him to measure Twin A's clock as running faster. Because The distance between A and B are much greater now, this speed up will over shadow the slow down effect effect due to relative velocity. B will measure A's clock as running consideralby faster.

 

This will continue after B comes to a stop and accelerates back towards A.

 

Coasting again, and A's clock is once again seen as running slow.

 

Braking, and A's clock runs slow due to both effects. (though the acceleration effect is small because the distance between A and B is small.)

 

After B comes to a stop he notes that more time has accrued on A's clock and A is older. (The period he measured clock A as moving fast more than compensate for the periods it ran slow)

 

Twin A aged more becuase his clock ran Slow, very fast, and then slow again with the very fast perod predominating.

 

Thus both twins agree as to who is younger, and by how much, but do not agree as to how this came to be.

 

And there is no way to choose one Twin's interpretaton of events over the other's. Each are equally valid and "Real". Which one you use depends on whether you are twin A or Twin B.

 

This is what is meant by "Time is Relative". There is no universal "real" time rate that is modifyed by velocity. There are only the relative time rates measured from within frames, and which one is "real" depends upon which frame you work from.

 

All that is required is that clocks that are separated into different frames agree as to their respective time differences when brought back into the same frame again. (they don't have to agree as to how the difference came about. )

[aman]

If one twin travels in empty space near the speed of light and one twin circles a black hole for a while where gravity has compressed space, will there be a time differential observed? Just curious.

Just aman

[Kedas]

I think MrL_JaKiri said something about it indirectly in one of his first messages.

Gravity does have the same effect although I'm not sure about that.

(because it's also the same acceleration effect)

 

MrL_JaKiri? any clear explanation ?

[Janus]

aman said in post #43 :

If one twin travels in empty space near the speed of light and one twin circles a black hole for a while where gravity has compressed space, will there be a time differential observed? Just curious.

Just aman

 

It depends on who's doing the asking, and the exact conditions of the test. Do both ships start out at the same point and then return to that point? If so, where is this point located? Or are you jjust comparing their time rates as observed by a third observer? And if so, where is this observer located?

[Kedas]

Lets say seen from a third observer that has little influence of the black hole gravity.

3 persons:

- one stays at his location no acelerations.

- one goes to a nearby black hole and stays there for a while.

- the other one is going at almost light speed away.

 

then they both return to the one observer.

 

What are their individual clocks now if they compare.

[IMI]

There are two ways of looking at this (referring to Twin A, B, and their clocks). You can note the time difference of the clocks upon Twin B's return and say that time itself slowed....Or you could postulate that Twin B's clock succumbed to some natural property, associated with travelling at speed x, which caused it to run slower. The latter seems to make much more sense then does the former. Think about how a clock works for a minute. It doesn't determine time by measuring anything tangible in which less or more of it will effect the reading of the clock. It is simply set to count at a certain increment. I would doubt the mechanics of such a device before I would presuppose that time itself had changed.

[Janus]

Kedas said in post #46 :

Lets say seen from a third observer that has little influence of the black hole gravity.

3 persons:

- one stays at his location no acelerations.

- one goes to a nearby black hole and stays there for a while.

- the other one is going at almost light speed away.

 

then they both return to the one observer.

 

What are their individual clocks now if they compare.

 

Well, if the one that goes to the Black hole orbits at an distance that cuases his oribtal speed to equal that of the one just traveling at near c, then he will experience the least time. There are two effects to take into account, his motion, and his postion in the gravity of the blackhole. If you move him out futher, you will finally reach a point where he will experience that same time as the other due to the combination of the effects. Move him evenfurther out and he will experience more time.

[Janus]

IMI said in post #47 :

There are two ways of looking at this (referring to Twin A, B, and their clocks). You can note the time difference of the clocks upon Twin B's return and say that time itself slowed....Or you could postulate that Twin B's clock succumbed to some natural property, associated with travelling at speed x, which caused it to run slower. The latter seems to make much more sense then does the former. Think about how a clock works for a minute. It doesn't determine time by measuring anything tangible in which less or more of it will effect the reading of the clock. It is simply set to count at a certain increment. I would doubt the mechanics of such a device before I would presuppose that time itself had changed.

 

The problem with this outlook is that it doesn't result in the same set of observation for the Twins as Relativity predicts. For this outlook to be true, the twin that ages the least would have to measure the other's clock as moving faster than his during the entire trip, but he doesn't.

 

Also, this would imply that there was an absolute reference system by which you could measure an object's velocity with respect to. This would mean we could measure the Earth's velocity around the sun with respect to it also.

 

That would lead to the following result:

When a particle accelerator fired a particle in the same direction as the Earth is moving, the Earth's velocity would be added to the particle's velocity, and if fired in the opposite direction, the Earth's velocity would be subtracted.

 

At the near c speeds that such particles travel, even such a relatively small addition or subtraction would cause a measurable difference in the time dilation and the amount of energy needed to accelerate the particle. No such deviation has ever been measured in any accelerator experiment.

 

Since this is the case, your second way of looking at it can't be true.

[ski_power]

Hi Guys, I've just got one doubt. Suppose one fellow is in a rocket, and has constant acc. = a. Now according to you guys he'll be younger than the earth bound human. But what about the watches on their hands? Will it show the same time or will the times be diff.

(Assuming that the watches were synched before liftoff)