Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #360327

Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox

Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Date	2015-08-11 08:06 -0700
References	<mo5s70$vaf$1@dont-email.me> <5ab14ac8-8fd5-4790-bb42-e9825e8e8c8c@googlegroups.com> <8f14d51f-352e-4edd-bd7b-c13afd5bcd58@googlegroups.com> <24dc58d7-1914-4a55-ba71-db9d753016a3@googlegroups.com>
Message-ID	<e25c7f2e-b96b-4075-a57e-14423df5dceb@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox
From	kenseto <setoken@att.net>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 10:39:36 AM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 11, 2015 at 12:35:02 AM UTC-4, Koobee Wublee wrote:
>  
> > The Lorentz transform, namely special relativity (SR), applies 
> > in both inertial and non-inertial frames of reference.  
> 
> Not true. Here is a counterexample of your claim;:
> 
> On Earth (a non constant grav field), place a clock at the bottom of a tall building and another at the top. The building will be your "spatial grid", your positions. The clocs\ks are at rest wrt each other. E-Synch your clock(s). Wait...wait...wait...
> 
> They will no longer be synchronized. That is an experimental fact. 
> 
> What do the LT's predict: t' = (t-vx/c2)g. Since v = 0, t'=t, which contradicts our above conclusion.

But v is not equal to zero. It is calculated as follows:
v=(universal wavelength of the source)(measured frequency of 
the source - measure frequency at the detector)

 
> 
> So you definately CANT apply the LT's as is from within an non inertial frame. 
> You can however apply the relativity principle (as GR does) from within non iframes.

Thread

Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 13:07 -0700
  Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-08-10 22:10 +0200
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 13:36 -0700
      Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-08-10 22:54 +0200
  Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-08-10 16:53 -0500
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Jon Price <jonelwoodprice@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 18:24 -0700
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 23:06 -0700
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-11 05:43 -0700
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-01 09:32 -0700
      Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-02 10:32 -0500
        Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-06 22:01 -0700
          Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-07 09:52 -0500
  Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-08-10 21:34 -0700
    Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 07:39 -0700
      Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-11 08:06 -0700
        Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 08:34 -0700
          Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-11 08:47 -0700
            Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 11:02 -0500
              Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-11 14:49 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2015-08-11 15:11 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-11 17:16 -0500
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-12 07:11 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 09:53 -0500
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-12 09:09 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 11:29 -0500
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-12 13:09 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 15:39 -0500
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-08-12 14:47 -0700
                Re: Inescapable (symmetric) twins paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-08-12 16:52 -0500

csiph-web