Talk-Polywell.org

it should be obvious to anybody that can do high school algebra that except for the change in the Doppler factor, you will also on the returm leg have that both twins will receive the exact same number of pulses. Perhaps you could enlighten us. Looking at the diagrams in my post, The diagrams in yo...

Anyone who wants to see the mistake in Johan's incredibly complex Lorentz Transform post above should note only the sign of the Doppler effect. Johan is only considering the (1+v/c) component of the Doppler (inbound journey) when he has to consider both inbound and outbound. Look through all his eq...

Sorry, what intertial reference frame? Both twins are each within an inertial reference frame and they each send out light pulses from their reference frames. I am not involing reference frames here. All I consider is the Doppler effect on light emitted by one twin and received by the other. So you...

How did you calculate the distance between the two twins? Is it correct to assume that in the first diagram the distance at any time T is v*T? And in the second diagram the distance at time T(prime) is given by v*T(prime)? I do not calculate or use the distance between the twins. I rely only on the...

To show the twins must have different ages, all you need is Doppler effect, and Einstein's 2nd postulate - which Johan has been silent about. Not at all. It should really not be a separate postulate since it can be considered a direct consequence of Einstein's first postulate that the laws of physi...

All this argumentation has lead me to a new question for myself though. Why does vacuum energy not break the principle of relativity. I am definitely not familiar with quantum field theory. However, it seems to me that if one assigns an energy density to a space itself that seems to imply a preferr...

Hello all, Newbie here. I'm a regular on the James Randi Foundation forums (forums.randi.org). I just wanted to point out (and I apologize if this is inappropriate) that Johan F. Prins spent most of the past few months conducting exactly this argument on a forum over there---there was a thread on "...

This link shows how the "orbit" of Juptier looks centered on Earth. There is a relativistic component to Juptiers position in Earth's gravity well as well as a speed component regarding Jupiters overall progression "around" Earth. Scroll to the bottom to see the animation. http://astronomy.nmsu.edu...

on that note, it would be interesting to recreate SR experiments using materials that have been quantum entangled. Very good! At this point I am going to let another cat loose amongst the pigeons by claiming that time does not exist within an entangled wave. Entanglement and gravity are related mor...

Can you show where the calculation is wrong, or do you just claim it's wrong because the results don't meet your expectations? I must admit that I do not have the time to go through your calculation. It is unnecessarily complicated because you involve more than just the two twins and you conclu0iso...

happyjack, that is not the question. We all agree that time rate in rest frame of clock can be so defined, in fact this is tautology. So you agree that the time rate within different inertial reference frames MUST be the same? This is so obvious that it is not really an achievement to realise this!...

So if you are on board the GPS Satelite as a rider, and look at the clock output, it will look slow, just as it did on the surface of the earth prior to launch (due to the embedded adjustment)? Or will it tell you that one second is one second, and all is good? As I have explained before: If there ...

well yes, we are defining our unit of time rate as being a certain proportion to, say, ten half lives of a cesium particle at rest relative to our local inertial reference frame. thus, the time rate in each inertial reference frame is the same: ten half lives of a cesium particle at rest relative t...

Two comments Johan: (1) You have not replied to my proof above that the two twins clock's must read different times. I was expecting you to say which link in the reasoning you disagree with. I can only suppose you now accept this. Thankyou. Which proof? I did not see a valid proof. Maybe what you t...

To elaborate: "rate of time" comparison requires comparing times (same as synchronising) at two different instants. Yes, within the same reference frame. Whether the clocks are synchronised or not, they must thus keep the same time rate within their respective inertial reference frames as demanded ...