The Twin Paradox.

Recommended Videos

Maze1125

New member
Oct 14, 2008
1,679
0
0
Pyromania192 said:
If the distance to the target is 4 light years away, and the spaceship is moving at almost the speed of light, shouldn't that mean that he takes just over 4 years to get to the target?
Yes, that is what an observer at his destination would see.
The people on the space-ship, however, would think that the journey only took a few weeks.
 

Lukeje

New member
Feb 6, 2008
4,048
0
0
The_AC said:
It's a theory that 2 is the only even priime number. Guess what. That theory's probably correct.
That's a theorem, not a theory.
 

Sporky111

Digital Wizard
Dec 17, 2008
4,009
0
0
I believe that changing viewpoint to the brother in the spaceship would make no difference. To him, his 40 year journey would not seem like 40 years because he is traveling near light-speed. Just because the Earth appears to be zooming away from him at light speed makes no difference: He is moving at light speed, a beam of light moving on the same vector as him would appear to have the same speed; a beam of light moving past the earth would still appear to be moving at light-speed. Space contracts around the spaceship only, therefore the latter scenario untrue.

This is just my take, I really don't know anything about the theory of relativity.
 

klakkat

New member
May 24, 2008
825
0
0
What Maze1125 said is correct; if a ship moves at approximately the speed of light (99% or so), then it will appear to take 4 years to get to a destination 4 light years away, from an observer at either end point (these measurements will typically be done by bouncing light waves off the ship; i.e. receiving communications from them). However, the crew on the ship will observe a much shorter time, but they will also measure a shorter distance traveled; the two effects pair up so they will measure exactly the same velocity on their ship as an observer stationary to the endpoints of the journey.

The_AC said:
This might be a dumb question, but does this paradox prove that acceleration is what causes time dilation (and causes the time to remain dilated until acceleration/decelleration occurs), rather than velocity? I'm asking this because the reason the Earth's frame is "correct" is because it isn't accelerating.
Acceleration does cause time dilation, but in a very complex manner; as I haven't done any work with General Relativity I don't understand the relationship fully. Special Relativity relies primarily on zero-acceleration situations (called inertial reference frames), and does exhibit time dilation. So, simple time dilation is based on relative velocities, not acceleration. It is probably better not to think of relativistic effects as something that 'builds up' as you accelerate, since the relativistic effects during acceleration don't match up well with zero-acceleration situations.