How do you solve the twins Paradox? [duplicate]












1












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

    9 answers




I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-



So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.



So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?



This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic 52 secs ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
    $endgroup$
    – StephenG
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    2 hours ago
















1












$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

    9 answers




I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-



So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.



So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?



This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$



marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic 52 secs ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
    $endgroup$
    – StephenG
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    2 hours ago














1












1








1





$begingroup$



This question already has an answer here:




  • What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

    9 answers




I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-



So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.



So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?



This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$





This question already has an answer here:




  • What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

    9 answers




I'm a beginner physics student only studying elementary AP-level physics and calculus, so when I came across the conceptual basis of the twins paradox I was, of course curious. People often explain the paradox away by explaining how the symmetry from each perspective is broken, without satisfactorily illustrating why. Before I ask my question I want to explain from my understanding-



So you have a twin on earth who understands that his twin is on a spaceship accelerating away arbitrarily close to the speed of light then returning home. He accelerates away and comes back, and I understand why the twin on the spaceship believes the other is older- Because on a spacetime diagram, we recognize that the axis flips and the twin on the ship understands that the relativistic affect on him will result in a difference.



So my question is: How do both observers figure out WHO is accelerating to begin with? To illustrate my problem with the paradox, I instead imagine two twins floating in space 1 meter apart in a vacuum, until one sees the other accelerate to near light speed. If we assume that the twins will return to their initial position at 1 meter apart, only ONE of them will age. The problem is figuring out who?



This is because: If twin A assumes he is stationary, and twin B assumes he is accelerating, then they can work out the respective maths. But what happens if both assume that they are accelerating, or that both are stationary? This is what results in the apparent paradox isn't it? So the real question should be: How do we know who is objectively accelerating?





This question already has an answer here:




  • What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?

    9 answers








special-relativity reference-frames acceleration






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago









Qmechanic

108k122001249




108k122001249






New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 3 hours ago









Roberto SingerRoberto Singer

82




82




New contributor




Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Roberto Singer is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic 52 secs ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









marked as duplicate by StephenG, ZeroTheHero, Aaron Stevens, Qmechanic 52 secs ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.










  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
    $endgroup$
    – StephenG
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    2 hours ago














  • 3




    $begingroup$
    Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
    $endgroup$
    – StephenG
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    3 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    @RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
    $endgroup$
    – Aaron Stevens
    2 hours ago








3




3




$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago






$begingroup$
Possible duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox?
$endgroup$
– StephenG
3 hours ago














$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago






$begingroup$
No, these answers all assume from the getgo that one twin is accelerating and knows he is accelerating, and the other twin is stationary and knows he is stationary, and both observers agree on who is what. If all you know is that the other observer is accelerating, how do you measure which of the twins is really experiencing acceleration? The paradox arises when each twin assumes he is stationary/accelerating. If they agree on which is which its easy to make the calculations, but how can they objectively measure whose frame is consistently inertial?
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
3 hours ago














$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
@RobertoSinger Acceleration isn't subjective
$endgroup$
– Aaron Stevens
2 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."



These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.



Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
    $endgroup$
    – Will
    2 hours ago


















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4












$begingroup$

The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."



These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.



Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
    $endgroup$
    – Will
    2 hours ago
















4












$begingroup$

The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."



These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.



Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
    $endgroup$
    – Will
    2 hours ago














4












4








4





$begingroup$

The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."



These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.



Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.






share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






$endgroup$



The resolution to the paradox is that, although velocity is relative, acceleration is in general not, so the situation is not actually symmetric. An easy way to see this is to imagine what you feel when your car accelerates: you feel your seat push you forward, or when you slam on the brakes you feel your seatbelt hold you back. You do not feel the same effects when you look at some other car that is accelerating "relative to you."



These are measurable effects, so each twin can independently determine whether she is herself accelerating, in addition to looking at the other twin's motion. Thus there is no ambiguity in which twin accelerates.



Note: I'm posting this answer because it is simple, even though this is indeed a duplicate of What is the proper way to explain the twin paradox. See the answers there for a more detailed description of what is actually going on.







share|cite|improve this answer








New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer






New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









answered 3 hours ago









WillWill

1114




1114




New contributor




Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Will is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
    $endgroup$
    – Will
    2 hours ago


















  • $begingroup$
    That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
    $endgroup$
    – Roberto Singer
    2 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
    $endgroup$
    – Will
    2 hours ago
















$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
That's actually a perfect answer, exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!
$endgroup$
– Roberto Singer
2 hours ago












$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago




$begingroup$
Cheers, I'm so glad it was helpful! Good luck with your continued study :)
$endgroup$
– Will
2 hours ago



Popular posts from this blog

Ponta tanko

Tantalo (mitologio)

Erzsébet Schaár