According to SR...

MD doesn't read very well. Nor comprehend what he reads.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You're very quiet, Tach. Rather speechless, eh? Cat got your tongue? Maybe it's just hard to speak with foot in mouth?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We are not including travel time. The stop watches were started simultaneously when the twin returned home, and stopped when the light returned. Comprehension problems, Alex?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But he has a lot of time to troll....

 

...meaning that this has nothing to do with the twins paradox. Both clocks show 120s. Time for you to stop trolling.

 

Still no answer, Tach? Answer my question, troll.

 

And Tach answers 2 minutes.

Not including travel time means that this has nothing to do with the twins paradox. The two twins are in the same inertial frame, and will clock the same time. Light travels 1 minute to the mirror, and 1 minute back, both stop watches will record the same time.

This is trivial, and demonstrates nothing.

 

I asked you the elapsed times the stop watches read, not the total time of light travel.

Oh, that's right, you say two identical stop watches read two different times when started and stopped simultaneously.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You're a funny guy, Tach.

 

....not for the deeply delusional Motor, who still thinks that he can disprove mainstream physics ......

 

Then you disagree with Tach, that one stop watch will read 1 minute and 9 seconds, and the other will read exactly 1 minute? You don't even understand the question.

 

LOL, now you are demonstrating that you aren't able to read clocks? Do your delusions of antirelativism include the inability to understand what clocks read?

 

It's you that can't read a clock. Two identical clocks side by side, started simultaneously and stopped simultaneously, and you say one reads 1 minute and 9 seconds and the other reads 1 minute.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

As is true for all conversations with MD, this just gets sillier as it goes on.

 

Tach has said that both watches will record 2 minutes.

Why do you have such a problem understanding what's been written?

 

The real silliness is derived from statements such as Tach's, where he fails to admit his mistakes in order to protect what he believes to be true.

The silliness is that two clocks in the same frame started and stopped simultaneously can read two different times. ABSURD!

 

As near as I can tell YOU are the only on that has said that.

 

What do you not understand about this statement Tach made, Alex?

He is saying that upon being reunited, the twins don't agree on how much time elapses from the time they are reunited until the light returns to their location. That one twin says 1 minute and 9 second elapses from reunion until arrival of light, and the other says 1 minute elapses from reunion until the arrival of light. Mind you, they are standing side by side the entire duration from reunion until the return of the light.

 

It means that the clocks elapsed time is a function of when the clocks get started and stopped. Since you changed your story about the start/stop times, you received two different answers. Now, it is time for you to stop trolling this thread since what you have been posting has nothing to do with the thread subject.

 

No, that's not what tach is saying. He's saying that upon being reunited, the twins don't agree on how much time elapses since they seperated.

He has said, several times, that starting the clocks when they are reunited will result in the same time being recorded by both clocks.

You do have serious reading comprehension problems, undoubtedly stemming from the fact that you don't see anything you don't want to see.

 

I asked you how much time elapses from when the twins are reunited to the when the light returns. Do you want to change your answer or are you sticking with 1 minute and 9 seconds, and 1 minute??