Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Physicist
Okay, I've gone back over the examples, and our frames of reference are now in alignment.

My problem was that I was conflating these two events into simultaneity -- "The pilot waits until a month elapses, and calculates what the time is on Earth. Only five days have passed; it's January 6th. Then he slams on the brakes, turns it around, and heads for home ..."

Quite obviously, a lot happens between the point at which he satisfies himself that he has gone far enough, and the point at which he actually turns around. A lot of "events" get telescoped into that interval.

191 posted on 02/12/2006 8:51:52 AM PST by NicknamedBob (Well, we had Uncle Joe. Then we had our Uncle Ho. Now it looks like we have an Uncle Mo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies ]


To: NicknamedBob
Quite obviously, a lot happens between the point at which he satisfies himself that he has gone far enough, and the point at which he actually turns around. A lot of "events" get telescoped into that interval.

Precisely. The solution to the twins problem is sometimes referred to as the "simultaneity gap", but I consider that a misnomer, because there isn't an actual gap, unless you contrive something like my acceleration-free example. But during the turn-around, there's a hell of a "fast-forward" that takes place back on Earth, from the traveller's point of view.

200 posted on 02/12/2006 6:43:42 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson