Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Twins Paradox and the speed of light
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 132 of 230 (628835)
08-13-2011 11:25 AM


another view on the twin paradox and gravitational relativity.
Hello,
I'm new here and from Belgium. My English is not very well, but I will try and I hope you will forgive me when I don't formulate something correct.
I'm a student in psychology (in my free time as an adult) and tried to think about perceiving time and space by an observer.
I think I found an interesting issue, related to relativity. I want to post it on the forum for criticism. To get some feedback.
The twinparadox
I believe that the twinparadox is for relative movements in a uniform gravitational field.
Why?
Because when an astronaut leaves earth, he must accellerate to leave the gravitational field.
While he is accellerating away from Earth, he sees the 'object Earth' more and more turning around.
First the Earth stood still, no he sees the earth more and more turning around. So the heavy object were he is moving away from is not only moving away from him from his reference point of view. This heavy object is also turning around itself more and more.
When the astronaut is leaving the solarsystem, he is not only measuring that the heavy object Earth is moving away from him relative to his reference point of view.
No, he sees that the heavy object Earth also succesively is turning around the sun more and more till it reaches the speed of 30 m/s around the sun.
When the earth is moving away from him - relative to his reference point of view - it's also spinning around the sun at 30 m/s, then the astronaut himself is outside the solarsystem and is not turning around the sun anymore.
So the timedilation of the object by progressively spinning in the gravitational field by the measurements of the moving observer is is not calculated in the measurements of relativity in the gravitational field.
The Earth or any other object is not only going away from us from our point of view, but is also beginning to move around its axis, around the sun, the sun begins to move in the milkeyway. While we are leaving the solarsystem.
When an heavy object as the sun is not only moving away from our point of view (we as astronauts, escaping the gravitational influence from the sun), but also begins to move in the gravitational field (g) in the Milkey Way, while we are leaving the Milkey Way, according to us, then there is no paradox anymore for the timedistortions.
Both objects will have the same time while coming back together.
The twins will have the same age when they meet again.
Because the twin who stood on earth was not only accelarating away relative to the traveling twin. He was also turning around more and more. Spinning around the earth, wobbling with a moon, spinning more and more around a sun and so on.
The timedilations caused by these measurable spinning movements are not involved in the calculations for gravitational relativity.
Therefore I think that the twinparadox is only a paradox in a uniform gravitational field, but not when an observer is moving away from an object in space.
When an observer is moving away from an object in space, that object is not only moving away from him from his point of view. But while he or she is accellerating to escape the gravitational field, that object begins also to spin in the gravitational field that he is leaving.
The gravitational accelerations of the bodies will be measured too as movements of these bodies where we, as observers, are moving away from, and will be the cause for the measured timedistortions of these bodies.
Then the timedilations caused by these movements will cancel eachother out.
The twins will have the same age.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-13-2011 11:39 AM Maartenn100 has replied
 Message 135 by cavediver, posted 08-13-2011 12:21 PM Maartenn100 has not replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 134 of 230 (628842)
08-13-2011 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 133 by Adminnemooseus
08-13-2011 11:39 AM


Re: We've just had a time dilation event happen!
yes I know, but I already know a lot about relativity and the twin paradox. I've read more books than the few articles here about relativity. But I understand your concern.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Adminnemooseus, posted 08-13-2011 11:39 AM Adminnemooseus has seen this message but not replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 136 of 230 (628848)
08-13-2011 12:31 PM


Yes, that makes sense. Hubble's law.
But first: When the astronaut/twin is accelerating away from (the other twin on) Earth and tries to reach escapevelocitiy, the object (Earth) where he is moving away from, is not only moving away from him from his point of view, but begins also to turn around its axis more and more, no?
There is no redshifting yet.
So, while the astronaut is accelerating away from the object, the object begins to move around it's axis (with the twin on it)
This acceleration of the object around itself or in the gravitational field while the twin is moving away from it, will cause timedilation for that heavy object. (Earth).
(because Earth is moving too)
So these timedilations will cancel eachother out, I think. The accelerating astronaut will not be younger than its twin brother on Earth. Because the other brother at home will move too in the gravitational field. There is no paradox. (I think)
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by cavediver, posted 08-13-2011 1:16 PM Maartenn100 has replied
 Message 138 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2011 2:01 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 139 of 230 (628869)
08-13-2011 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by NoNukes
08-13-2011 2:01 PM


ok thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2011 2:01 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 140 of 230 (628871)
08-13-2011 3:05 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by cavediver
08-13-2011 1:16 PM


No - from the point of view of the astronaut, the Earth is turning less and less. Each day Big Ben sounds noon in London, we sends a signal to the astronaut. But each day, the astronaut is further away, so the time interval he measures between receiving each signal gets longer and longer.
ok, but when you are just leaving earth with an escapevelocity, the object 'Earth' begins to move more and more. Because you are escaping gravity. So you will see the Earth turning around.
So, when you are moving away from any object in space with escapevelocity and you leave the gravitational field (gravitational relativity), this object, where you are moving away from, begins to spin slowly - more and more - in its gravitational field, irrespective of your veliocity.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by cavediver, posted 08-13-2011 1:16 PM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by fearandloathing, posted 08-13-2011 3:39 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 142 of 230 (628881)
08-13-2011 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by fearandloathing
08-13-2011 3:39 PM


yes that's truth.
What I mean is:
The twin on earth is accelerating too, in circles. This spiral and spinning acceleration is equal to the straightforward acceleration of the traveling twin. (in relativity)
So both twins are travelling with the same speed away from eachother. Both will have the same age when they reunite. (and will stand still next to eachother).
Because their distortions where equal.
Both twins have traveled away from eachother with the same speed.
Relativitytheory does not has calculated the timedistortion of the moving twin on Earth in its gravitational field, spinning more and more.
The twin paradox is truth in a uniform gravitational field. But not in space, when the twin is leaving the gravitational field. (I think)
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by fearandloathing, posted 08-13-2011 3:39 PM fearandloathing has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by fearandloathing, posted 08-13-2011 5:42 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 144 of 230 (628886)
08-13-2011 6:40 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by fearandloathing
08-13-2011 5:42 PM


When you leave your twinsister on Earth she begins to rotate first from your point of view (rotation Earth), then to wobble with a moon, then to start speeding up around the sun. This happens while you are accelerating away from her.
This is your view of your twinsister on Earth while you are accelerating away from it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkWyM-M8o0c
She is speeding up too in the gravitational field.
That's what I mean with: you are accelerating, but the twinsister is too. So her time will distort too. Your ages will not differ.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by fearandloathing, posted 08-13-2011 5:42 PM fearandloathing has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2011 7:55 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 146 of 230 (628922)
08-14-2011 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by NoNukes
08-13-2011 7:55 PM


My hypothesis:
When you try to go outside the solar system, you must challenge gravity. You can not follow a linear path. When you do follow a straight line, you are turning around the sun. Why? Because gravity will pull you back. (straight lines in a curved spacetime).
I even believe that "straight forward" en "curved" is relative given by your 'frame of reference' in the gravitational field. (the universe)
(gravitational relativity: curved versus straightforward, given the frame of reference in the gravitatonal field (the universe))
You can make a resemblance with us here on earth: when you follow a straight line on earth, you will turn around earth, seen by an observer from out of space. From your point of view, you accelerate straight forward. But, from the point of view of an observer outside Earth's gravity, you are following a curved road and are forming circles.
The only 'straigh line' your see from out space is a coriolispath on earth.
So, you must first follow a coriolispath to follow a straight line. (a curved road).
You must always hold a centripital acceleration in the beginning according to yourself. Because when you accelerate straighforward, you are following straight lines in a curved spacetime, curved by the sun, the solarsystem etc. (gravity will pull you back).
And
When you try to escape the gravity of the solar system, by following these curved road,
your time wil distort by gravitational timedistortion.
And
Whey you escape gravity by following this curved road, you are not accelerating to near the speed of light.
(it will be very difficult)
And finally, you see the Earth redshifting.
So, when you do the - very complex - math: the clocks will be the same I think.
It's far more complex then you think.
So, I do not disagree on the twin paradox!!!
I only think it's truth for a uniform gravitational field. Not in the universe when you talk about different gravitational fields.
So it works on earth, when two objects move in the same "gravitational frame of reference".
It's too simple in a complex whole as the universe (I think): a straight forward speed versus hanging still.
In the universe you have gravity, curved spacetime, Hubble's law etc. A straight line is no straight line anymore.
A curved road can be straight depending on the gravitational frame of reference.
It's relative.
But in the same gravitational field: the twinparadox will do it.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by NoNukes, posted 08-13-2011 7:55 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by cavediver, posted 08-14-2011 7:14 AM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 148 of 230 (628927)
08-14-2011 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 147 by cavediver
08-14-2011 7:14 AM


gravitational theory of relativity
very interesting.
I will complete my hypothesis here on gravitational relativity effects.
I think that there is an effect in gravitational relativity that is not mentioned in relativity:
straight forward path versus curved path.
These are relativistic observations in and outside a 'gravitational frame of reference' like lengthcontraction is in a uniform gravitational field between a moving observer and a an observer who stands still.
1) When I accelerate lineair on Earth, I go straightforward according my gravitanal frame of reference.
2)When an astronaut sees me, he sees me going around in circles on a sphere (Earth).
This from within and from out a gravitational field.
This is a gravitational relativity effect.
(like moving earth versus earth standing still)
So, when you think you go straighforward in the solarsystem, you are following a curved road around the sun.
Relativity=
straight forward acceleration = centripetal acceleration
a = g
I worked this out as follow:
g0 = a = Fb
g0 = relative observed centripetal acceleration of the body from "outside the gravitational system frame of reference".
Fb = actual Newtonian gravitational force on the body of the graviational system.
a = acceleration of the body from the body 'frame of reference (lineair)
The expanding universe
Far starclusters should have a big centripetal acceleration (towards the universe as a whole), so we can calculate their mass by their observed relativistic straightforward acceleration and Newton’s law of gravity. (following this hypothesis)
a = Fb
Fb = G . m1.m2/r^2
So 'curved road' (coriolispath) = "straigh forward speed" and vice versa in gravitational relativity.
So "the expanding universe" is in this hypothesis a relativistic
effect of gravitational relativity instead of caused by a Big Bang.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by cavediver, posted 08-14-2011 7:14 AM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2011 12:14 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 150 of 230 (628936)
08-14-2011 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by NoNukes
08-14-2011 12:14 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
g = GM/r^2
I agree with gravitational timedilation but
you can see with your own eyes (I hope) that a when you follow a straight line here on earth, it's a circular path from out of space.
That's the only thing you need to know, when you want to know that a this is a relativistic effect.
it's a very obvious observation.
Ellipsode versus straight path.
The difference in time (gravitationale timedilation) gives this relativistic effect.
That's logic and observable.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by NoNukes, posted 08-14-2011 12:14 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 2:31 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 152 of 230 (628947)
08-14-2011 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by jar
08-14-2011 2:31 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
it's just an exercise for me in 'gravitational relativity' and its effects on observers.
you stand still on Earth, on the moon, on mars.
On every planet you are standing: you hang/stand still and the moon or planet is pushing you. (equivalenceprinciple).
The observer always hangs still and any havy object with him/her too.
(Earth, the moon, etc.)
Why: because his time is always 'normal' according to him. Wherever he (or she) is.
But when he has another time than an other object, that object moves according to him.
From a space point of view Earth moves. Because of the timedilation. But the observer in space has a normal time, so Earth must be round and moving. That's the consequence of the timedifference.
So: the 'normality' of the time for the observer and his or her position relative to a heavy object will change the observed movements of that object in gravitational relativity.
When you are on the moon: you see earth moving forward and going back and the moon stands still and is pushing you. (gravity and equivalenceprinciple)
When you are in space, for you: your clock ticks normal. So, other things must change. Earth must move, because the clocks differ.
I believe that the observer of space and time will be the cause of dilatation observations and effects.
Because wherever he is, time runs normal.
So, I think: wherever we are - as observers - in the universe. At the bounderies everything is redshifting. As a relativistic effect of space and time in the universe for any observer.
But , it's just a hypothesis.
The observor as the measure of space and time.
The observer is always weightless and hangings still.
A vehicle is pushing him/her, or a planet.
The observer is always at 0 m/s according to the maximum speed.
At nul time and nul space. That's our position, people.
We are outside time and space in 'the actual moment"= zero.
That's what I think.
A so called 'reference frame' is always an observer in reality.
The fallen observer (in free fall) is always weightless. He/she does not feel acceleration (no accelerated frame of reference)
And he (or she) is been observed from earth as 'hanging still'.
But observers on earth feel themselves pushed op by 1 g (equivalenceprinciple). So the 'fallen' observer is always hanging still.
So Earth falls towards you in a centripetal way and will become a stable world for you. All heavy objects will become a stable world for you.
Black hole
I believe that you are weightless above a black hole ande BH is accelerating toward you at a high velocity. Slowed down by its mass it's coming towards you. You and alle the objects 'in the sky' with you are hanging quitley.
But from outside this system, we see you circling around it at gigantic speed.
That's gravitational relativity to me in real life
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : English translation (I'm dutch)
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 2:31 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:33 PM Maartenn100 has replied
 Message 160 by Panda, posted 08-14-2011 7:07 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 154 of 230 (628949)
08-14-2011 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by jar
08-14-2011 5:33 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
Jar,
When you mean 'believe', you mean: based on nothing.
Then I agree.
But reality is 'logic' (as far as I know)
And with "believe" I mean: I have good reasons to believe...
It's based on logic and observations.
And that's what science is.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:33 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:49 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 156 of 230 (628952)
08-14-2011 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by jar
08-14-2011 5:49 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
(I'm dutch, so my English is not very well)
yes that's truth. We all must study our whole lives.
But we may also think for ourselves, isn't it?
Maybe 'reality' is not logical, science must be logical.
I think reality is logical.
Can you prove it (logical) that reality is not logical?
No, then reality is not logical.
Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
Edited by Maartenn100, : translation problem

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:49 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:57 PM Maartenn100 has replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 158 of 230 (628954)
08-14-2011 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by jar
08-14-2011 5:57 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
ok, back on topic.
So, according to my observations and logical explanation and derived from postulates of general relativity: the observer is the measure of space and time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by jar, posted 08-14-2011 5:57 PM jar has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by Maartenn100, posted 08-14-2011 6:34 PM Maartenn100 has not replied

  
Maartenn100
Member (Idle past 4592 days)
Posts: 39
From: Belgium Antwerp
Joined: 08-13-2011


Message 159 of 230 (628955)
08-14-2011 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Maartenn100
08-14-2011 6:02 PM


Re: gravitational theory of relativity
This is the video I made to explain my theory:
https://www.youtube.com/user/Maartenn100?feature=mhee#p/u...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Maartenn100, posted 08-14-2011 6:02 PM Maartenn100 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024