Acceleration has an affect on time. The faster you are traveling the slower the time is but this does not affect our everyday speeds. This is true when you move near speed of light. I mean it is true for our everyday speeds as well but not significantly ... actually let me double check on this... I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE BOOK IS RIGHT.... but right now i'm working on calculus... so when i have time i'll check it out... and post it back here... post the reason and the explanation.
2007-01-23 19:37:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The key to this is "observes".
As it is not stated HOW the travelling twin observes the earth clock so it must be visually. If twin A is travelling away from what he/she is observing at speed c then what he/she observes will appear to be moving (passing, in the event of time) slower.
If c is the speed of light then what you are observing will appear to be stationary because the light from the object is also travelling at speed c.
BUT if the traveller starts returning to the source of the observation at speed c then the opposite occurs and the observed item will appear to be moving faster.
Time will be passing slower for the traveller because they a moving.
This does mess up relativity though!
Relativity states that from each objects point of view it is stationary and the other object/s are moving. So if twin A is moving away from the earth at speed c then twin A could see this as him/her being stationary and it is in fact twin B and the earth which is moving at speed c!
2007-01-23 19:55:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The key to understanding the twin paradox is to realise that the twins are NOT equivalent, even though it is posed as though they are.
Twin A remains in a single frame of reference on Earth.
Twin B spend half of his time in a frame of referece travelling away from Earth, and the other half in a frame of reference travelling towards Earth. These are different reference frames.
There is no need to worry about acceleration to understand what is going on (though clearly there would be some in switching frames) - you just need to think about relative times in all three reference frames.
The paradox is not about the fact that passage of time is affected by relative speed - that much is easy - but that as phrased the situation sounds (but is not) symmetric and so it should be impossible to choose a twin who should age less.
2007-01-23 21:05:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The theory is that time slows down as you approach the speed of light, and completely stops once you reach it. Therefore the twin traveling at speed c (the speed of light/186,000 miles per second), his time ceases while the life of the twin on earth continues and he gets older. When the twin travelling at speed c returns to earth, for him no time has really passed, because time has slowed to a stop for him, but for his twin on Earth much time has passed. I hope that clears it up for you.
2007-01-23 19:38:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by ___ 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I know what you mean, and i 've had this confusion as well back in science class highschool and the teacher tried to explain to me but i dont get it no matter what he's saying...
yeah my teacher says when the travelling twin comes back to earth he should be younger then the earth twin, but i cant make sense out of it....
2007-01-23 19:44:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tosh 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is not about acceleration, it is about velocity.
And no, you are wrong. From the perspective of the traveling twin, his twin brother will be aging faster than real time. But that is because he is traveling through less time than his brother.
2007-01-23 19:37:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ask the single on the left if a million+a million equals 2. If he solutions particular, he's Rajesh, in any different case he's Rakesh. Any question that the two you and the twin understand the easy answer to could be used.
2016-11-26 22:44:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋