Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: Langevin's paradox again Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:27:03 +0000 Organization: novaBBS Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2156873"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="p+/k+WRPC4XqxRx3JUZcWF5fRnK/u/hzv6aL21GRPZM"; User-Agent: Rocksolid Light X-Rslight-Posting-User: 47dad9ee83da8658a9a980eb24d2d25075d9b155 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$WYnXvoVKDEuRejNgg4x7xOTGnBV0JIIAHV2NcBkL5/yPciBQuUBu. Bytes: 4649 Lines: 99 Richard Hachel wrote: > > Langevin's paradox. > The Langevin paradox is a very serious criticism against the theory of > relativity. No, it's not. It's only a paradox when part of the operation is ignored. That part has been explained in more than one way, but some don't seem capable of understanding. > [Verbal bobbling deleted] > > What was the grievance? > > If the twin of the stars returns younger in the frame of reference of > the twin who remained on earth, then the twin who remained on earth, > if we apply the reciprocity of effects, and Doctor Richard Hachel says > that we must use this notion of reciprocity, Dr. Hachel is wrong, along with all those who conveniently forget about the turn-around. And "reciprocity" doesn't even enter Dr. H's solution. > very basis of logic, comes back older than the other. Which is both > logical and absurd. “No, no, you’re not thinking: you’re just being logical” – Niels Bohr “Logic is like the sword--those who appeal to it shall perish by it.” -- Samuel Butler > No one has ever been able to answer the question correctly and > perfectly Incorrect assertion. > [Self-aggrandizing verbage deleted] > > The great problem facing the world's physicists is a problem of > confusion. > They confuse two notions: the notion of relativity of measured times, > and the notion of reciprocal relativity of chronotropies. Incorrect assertion. > It's not the same thing. > > Hence the impossibility for them all to explain things coherently. Not impossible. “There is no point in using the word 'impossible' to describe something that has clearly happened.” – Douglas Adams > The relativity of the measured times will show that over a journey of 24 > light years, carried out at v=0.8c, Terrence will age by 30 years. > It's very simple: x=v.t, i.e. t=x/v and 24[/]0.8=30 > But when Stella returns, she will only be 18 years old[er]. [Corrections made]. > There is therefore an asymmetry, that is obvious, but it is on the > explanation of the asymmetry that everyone sinks into complete > ignorance. Not everyone, and there is more than one way to skin a cat. > Because we are confusing it with the notion of chronotropy, which is > ANOTHER THING, and which can be defined by the internal functioning of > watches. On this, yes, the effect is symmetrical, reciprocal; each > watch, and throughout the entire journey, (including if I place a small > half-turn phase on a semi-circle with a preserved tangential speed of > 0.8c), beats faster than the other watch, and the equation is constant > and reciprocal over the entire path: T2=T1/sqrt(1-v²/c²). > > This is true. > > But this only qualifies chronotropy, that is to say the internal > mechanism of watches, it is not the whole of the relativistic effect. > > This is not what we will ultimately measure. > > I can't explain it more clearly. Then you have failed. Whether the entire path a semicircle, or just the end is a semicircle, particle physicists have known for nearly a century that time dilation occurs on circular paths based only on the velocity around the path. So Dr. hachel is a few years too late. If the semicircle is at the end of a straightaway, then Stella will endure a humongous acceleration and return home a puddle of goo. If, OTOH, her trajectory is a giant circle of 24 Lyrs circumference, she will, indeed, be 6 years younger than her twin, but if she wanted to reach a destination 24 LYrs AWAY, she will only reach a distance of 7.6 Lyrs from home. Usually, the problem is proposed as reaching a destination along a linear path and then returning, not taking a grand tour.