Time Dilation Explained: SR vs GR | Modern Physics by Taylor and Zalifatos

  • Thread starter OS Richert
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Time
In summary, the authors are saying that when an observer is in a moving reference frame, their clock will run slower than an observer who is stationary. However, when the observers are brought back together, the clocks will be back to normal.
  • #36
My motivation for posting here was to help OS Richert with his questions. I think I did help him understand the issue and my objective was to use a minimum of math.

If you think I wrote something incorrect in this topic then demonstrate it and at least provide some supporting arguments for accusing me of fudging up answers. So far you have not contributed anything except for making accusations of me fudging things.

I think what I wrote about the twin problem is correct, please feel free to show where my alledged errors are and where I misled or confused OS Richert.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
MeJennifer said:
My motivation for posting here was to help OS Richert with his questions. I think I did help him understand the issue and my objective was to use a minimum of math.

If you think I wrote something incorrect in this topic then demonstrate it and at least provide some supporting arguments for accusing me of fudging up answers.

I think what I wrote about the twin problem is correct, please feel free to show where my alledged errors are.

Re-read my post. You have "provided" a lot of confusion, I asked you to clear it up by posting the complete and correct math. There are a lot of unanswered questions, can you try to clear them. with math, not with more words.
 
  • #38
clj4 said:
Re-read my post. You have "provided" a lot of confusion, I asked you to clear it up by posting the complete and correct math. There are a lot of unanswered questions, can you try to clear them. with math, not with more words.
So who is confused here? I am not, Richert apparently is not, he got the answers he was looking for. He did not ask for math showing tilts of 3D-planes in space-time, or how to integrate the timelines of accelerated frames, that is not what this topic is about. He simply wanted to understand it in English. :smile:

Now what about you, are you confused about anything in the twin problem? Any problems with the math perhaps? If so perhaps I can help! :smile:

Or is it just that you have an issue with my explanation to Richert?
If so, fine, I have no problem with that.
But then demonstrate where my explanation is wrong or confusing.
 
Last edited:
  • #39
MeJennifer said:
So who is confused here? I am not, Richert apparently is not, he got the answers he was looking for. He did not ask for math showing tilts of 3D-planes in space-time, or how to integrate the timelines of accelerated frames, that is not what this topic is about. He simply wanted to understand it in English. :smile:
Looks like OS Richert never said "ok, MeJennifer, I understand". Instead of explaining things, you confused them.

Now what about you, are you confused about anything in the twin problem? Any problems with the math perhaps? If so perhaps I can help! :smile:
Yes, your "maths" are a collection of incomplete, botched up statements. So, I asked you to fix them. If you can. Please finish your "disertation". With math, not with prose. I understand math. Extremely well.

Or is it just that you have an issue with my explanation to Richert?
If so, fine, I have no problem with that.
Yes, your explanation is mathematically incomplete and incorrect. Please answer the questions and complete the calculations.
But then demonstrate where my explanation is wrong or confusing.

The first post you put up on the calculations were completely bogus. A simple question from me was sufficient for you to see the error and to abandon any folloup. You never answered my request yo complete the calculations. Why? Because you realized that the approach was incorrect.

The second post is a collection of things gathered at random,a little better but with missing explanations. You never completed any calculation, again. Why? Can you complete the calculations? If yes, please do so.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
54
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
523
Replies
88
Views
5K
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
70
Views
5K
Back
Top