Mike Fontenot alle ore 08:47:53 del 04/08/2017 ha scritto:
> Assuming that the traveler instantaneously accelerates to gamma = 8, the
> clock at S will read 40 years when T reaches there at age 5 years. But
> T says that the home twin is only 5/8 years old then. (As soon as T
> accelerates to gamma = 8, he will no longer regard the clock at S to be
> synchronized with the home twin's age. He says that the clock at S
> reads (40 - 5/8) once he has reached gamma = 8. I.e., he says that the
> clock at S suddenly changes from reading zero to reading (40 - 5/8)
> years when he accelerates (instantaneously) from gamma = 0 to gamma = 8.)
>
> Likewise, if T instantaneously reverses course, and goes back to the
> stay-at-home twin at gamma = 8, he will conclude that she only ages 5/8
> year during the constant-speed portion of his trip back.
>
> The important question is this: if the home twin only ages 5/8 year
> during each of the two constant speed portions of T's trip (a total of
> 10/8 years), how can she be much older (80 years older than T's 10
> years) when he returns (as we know she must be)?
>
> The answer is that, during the instantaneous turnaround of T, he
> concludes that her age instantaneously increases by (80 - 10/8) years.
> THAT is the important resolution of the twin "paradox".
Sė, questa brillante soluzione al paradosso ci dice che in 10 anni di
viaggio (del gemello viaggiatore) il fratello terrestre invecchia
soltanto un anno e poco pių (1,25) mentre bastano le due accelerazioni
per farlo invecchiare istantaneamente di quasi 79 anni!
Le accelerazioni sono proprio micidiali!
(Yes, this brilliant solution to the paradox tells us that in 10 years
of travel (of the traveling twin) the earthly brother ages only one
year and little more (1.25) while the two accelerations are enough to
make it instantaneously almost 79 years old! Accelerations are just
lethal!).
--
Luigi Fortunati
Credere e' piu' facile che pensare
Believing is easier than thinking
Received on Fri Aug 04 2017 - 19:21:01 CEST