An interesting conversation between James R & Tony

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by TonyYuan, Jun 24, 2023.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TonyYuan

    TonyYuan Gravitational Fields and Gravitational Waves Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    852
    • Your previous thread on this topic was closed for a reason. You may not simple duplicate the closed thread and thus override a moderator's decision.
    Tony:
    A and B are twins on the earth, they left the earth on the same day, and A and B were exactly the same young when they left.
    A and B have exactly the same acceleration and deceleration process, but A returns to the earth after reaching a speed of 0.1c. B maintains a constant speed after reaching 0.1c, and flies forward for another 10ly, and then returns to the earth.
    May I ask, when A and B meet again on the earth, which one will be younger?
    A and B have exactly the same acceleration and deceleration process, the only difference is that B flies 20ly more than A at a constant speed. Do you still have questions about the scene I proposed now? If there is no doubt, please tell me when A and B meet, which one is younger?
    James R:
    I think that in this case they will be the same age when they meet up at the end.
    Tony:
    James R, that is to say, although B flew at a speed of 0.1c for 20 ly, it did not make B younger than A who was lying on the sofa watching TV after returning to the ground. But But But SRT tells us that when B is flying at 0.1c, B's time will expand and slow down. How do you explain it? It looks like you don't support SR.
    James R:
    You talk about "when B is flying at 0.1 c". But A and B's final ages when they get back together don't just depend on "when B is flying at 0.1 c". They depend on the entire relative motion.
    Tony:
    You gave a very positive answer again, which is very good.
    But your answer will crash the chemist, your answer will crash SR, and your answer will crash the disciples of Einstein.

    According to James R's answer, acceleration is the root cause of time dilation, not the speed that SR thinks.
    James R thought I was attacking him maliciously. The West is a free, democratic, liberal society, doesn't it include here?
     
    Last edited: Jun 24, 2023
    TonyYuan, Jun 24, 2023
    #1

  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R

    James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Tony has obviously misinterpreted my answer. Time dilation can result from relative motion, acceleration or gravity (whose effects are equivalent to acceleration.)

    Tony has also consistently failed to find any flaw in the theory of relativity, or in my explanations to him concerning that theory.
     
    James R, Jun 24, 2023
    #2

  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R

    James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,426
    Moderator note: TonyYuan has been warned for trying to override a moderator's decision to close a previous thread of his by simply posting a new thread continuing the closed conversation.

    The previous thread was closed for a reason.

    Tony is advised not to make himself a drain on moderator time and energy. Review our site posting guidelines before posting on sciforums again.
     
    James R, Jun 24, 2023
    #3

  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page