According to SR...

[Motor Daddy]

Why do you keep asking the same questions over and over, adn ignore the answers? Is there something wrong with you?

I have no idea why you are given so much lattitude on this forum. Do you have something on the moderators?

Why do you have so much drama? Just answer the question. How much time elapses from the time the twins are reunited until the time the light returns?

[origin]

Neither of the stop watches traveled. I am asking you the ELAPSED TIME between the reunion until the return of the light. Do the twins agree that elapsed time is the same?

Your dishonesty knows no bounds, you keep switching the scenario! No matter how confusing you try to make this you cannot change reality - only your perception of it.

[Motor Daddy]

Your dishonesty knows no bounds, you keep switching the scenario! No matter how confusing you try to make this you cannot change reality - only your perception of it.

You're the one being dishonest and evading the question. Simply answer my question, HOW MUCH TIME ELAPSES FROM THE TIME THE TWINS ARE REUNITED UNTIL THE TIME THE LIGHT RETURNS TO THEIR POSITION?

[origin]

Why do you have so much drama? Just answer the question. How much time elapses from the time the twins are reunited until the time the light returns?

I have no idea which scenario you are on, so lets put it this way - when the twins are reunited and at the same inertial frame they will both agree on the passage of time.

[AlexG]

What MD is fishing for is you say one minute, and he says 'then if the light traveled for two minute, and the twins agree that it returned one minute after the traveling twin, then the traveling twin agrees that he's only been gone one minute'. He uses 'logic'.

Always bear in mind, it isn't so much that MD doesn't know relativity, he denies it exists.

[Motor Daddy]

I have no idea which scenario you are on, so lets put it this way - when the twins are reunited and at the same inertial frame they will both agree on the passage of time.

Good, so unlike Tach, you are saying they agree on the time. So if the stay at home twin says it is 60 seconds from the time the twin returned until the time the light returned, you say the twin that traveled agrees with that, correct?

[origin]

What MD is fishing for is you say one minute, and he says 'then if the light traveled for two minute, and the twins agree that it returned one minute after the traveling twin, then the traveling twin agrees that he's only been gone one minute'. He uses 'logic'.

Always bear in mind, it isn't so much that MD doesn't know relativity, he denies it exists.

The only part of that statement I disagree with, is that he knows relativity - I would say he has a very hazy, vague, semi-grasp of some of the aspects.

[origin]

Good, so unlike Tach, you are saying they agree on the time. So if the stay at home twin says it is 60 seconds from the time the twin returned until the time the light returned, you say the twin that traveled agrees with that, correct?

No, I am agreeing with Tach.

[Motor Daddy]

No, I am agreeing with Tach.

So you too are of the opinion that two people in the same frame, given identical stop watches, simultaneously started and stopped, that the stop watches read two different times?

[AlexG]

The only part of that statement I disagree with, is that he knows relativity - I would say he has a very hazy, vague, semi-grasp of some of the aspects.

I didn't mean to imply he did, just that his problem goes well beyond simple ignorance.

[AlexG]

So you too are of the opinion that two people in the same frame, given identical stop watches, simultaneously started and stopped, that the stop watches read two different times?

Of course, that's not what tach said, but MD only sees what he wants to see.

I'm going off to drink beer and shoot pool. I'm sure that when I return in several hours, there will have been absolutely no progress of any kind.

[origin]

So you too are of the opinion that two people in the same frame, given identical stop watches, simultaneously started and stopped, that the stop watches read two different times?

In this scenario does one of the twins travel at relativistic speeds between the starting and stopping of the watches?

[Motor Daddy]

Of course, that's not what tach said, but MD only sees what he wants to see.

That is what he is saying. I asked him, and he said 1 minute and 9 seconds, and 1 minute, when they are side by side, and simultaneously started and stopped.

[Motor Daddy]

In this scenario does one of the twins travel at relativistic speeds between the starting and stopping of the watches?

No. They are side by side, in the same frame, no relative motion. The stop watches are started simultaneously when the twin returns and stopped simultaneously when the light arrives.

[origin]

Deleted

[AlexG]

No. They are side by side, in the same frame, no relative motion. The stop watches are started simultaneously when the twin returns and stopped simultaneously when the light arrives.

Then, as has been said many times already, the watches read 1 minute.

[Motor Daddy]

In that case I agree with tach, alex and everyone else that the watches read the same.

Are you listening to what I am saying? Tach says that one watch reads 1 minute and 9 seconds and the other watch reads 1 minute.

[Motor Daddy]

Then, as has been said many times already, the watches read 1 minute.

Tach says they read different times, one reads 1 minute and 9 seconds and one reads 1 minute.

[AlexG]

Tach says they read different times, one reads 1 minute and 9 seconds and one reads 1 minute.

tach said:

so both clocks show elapsed time t3=1m

[origin]

Are you listening to what I am saying? Tach says that one watch reads 1 minute and 9 seconds and the other watch reads 1 minute.

Yeah you tricked me, I said "did one of them leave" and you said they were side by side, but then I missed you said "the returning twin". Good one I missed it so in that case I agree that tach that of course there clocks will not read the same.

I am deleting my earlier post because your calculated dishonesty was the reason that I wrote and incorrect response