{"id":3377,"date":"2013-06-06T04:15:06","date_gmt":"2013-06-06T03:15:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/?p=3377"},"modified":"2013-06-06T04:15:06","modified_gmt":"2013-06-06T03:15:06","slug":"time-dilation-and-twin-paradox-debunked-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/time-dilation-and-twin-paradox-debunked-2010\/","title":{"rendered":"Time dilation and twin paradox debunked 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\"\"<\/dt>\n<\/dl>\n

By Thomas Smid<\/span><\/a><\/span> <\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Beitrag aus dem GOM-Projekt: 2394 weitere kritische Ver\u00f6ffentlichungen <\/span><\/a>
\n<\/strong>zur Erg\u00e4nzung der Dokumentation<\/span><\/a><\/strong> Textversion 1.2 \u2013 2004, Kapitel 4. <\/em><\/p>\n

Time dilation and twin paradox debunked <\/b>\/ Thomas Smid. – [U. K.]: WWW 2010. 2 S.\u00a0
\nURL: <\/span>http:\/\/www.physicsmyths.org.uk\/timedilation.htm<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/span>\u00a0
\nThe Special Theory of Relativity (as developed by Einstein) obtains a set of equations (i.e. the Lorentz Transformation formulae) which relates length and time units of two systems moving uniformly relatively to each other. <\/span><\/p>\n

Unlike the equations of the usual Galilei Transformation, these are not merely a linear transformation (describing the change in distance between two points due to the motion), but they are non-linear in the velocity due to an additional factor ? containing the ratio of the velocity and the speed of light (see for instance my <\/span>Aberration<\/span><\/a><\/span> page for details). This factor ? corresponds to the amount of ‚length contraction‘ and ‚time dilation‘ that, according to Special Relativity, should be taken into account if transforming length and time units between different reference frames moving relatively to each other with non-zero velocity. However, this re-scaling of the space and time coordinates is in fact the result of Einstein ignoring the principle of the constancy of the speed of light by applying the usual vectorial velocity addition and then subsequently trying to compensate for this error by making a further error and changing the given length and time definitions (see my page regarding the <\/span>Speed of Light<\/span><\/a><\/span>). As indicated on my page, with a consistent definition for the ‚Speed of Light‘, no re-scaling of the length and time units is indeed required to make it independent of the motion of objects. The conclusions of time dilation and length contraction are hence invalid because they are based on a set of equations that is inconsistent with physical principles. This inconsistency is also evident from the well known ‚Twin Paradox‘ which is due to the fact that motion is always only relative and any time dilation effect would therefore be ambiguous. Relativists claim that the situation would in practice never be symmetric as one observer has to turn around (and change the reference frame in the process) in order to compare the clocks (see for instance <\/span>http:\/\/www.phys.vt.edu\/~jhs\/faq\/twins.html<\/span><\/a><\/span>), but it is clear that this argument does not hold water as the time dilation should already be apparent before one observer turns around (the difference in the final clock readings must have accumulated during the whole time considered). <\/span><\/p>\n

I shall examine the inconsistencies and logical paradoxes implied by the Lorentz transformation in more detail below, first from a purely algebraic point of view, then for a couple of thought experiments supported by appropriate graphics. <\/span><\/p>\n

Lesen Sie bitte <\/span>hier<\/span><\/a><\/b><\/span> weiter! <\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Thomas Smid Beitrag aus dem GOM-Projekt: 2394 weitere kritische Ver\u00f6ffentlichungen zur Erg\u00e4nzung der Dokumentation Textversion 1.2 \u2013 2004, Kapitel 4. Time dilation and twin paradox debunked \/ Thomas Smid. – [U. K.]: WWW 2010. 2 S.\u00a0 URL: http:\/\/www.physicsmyths.org.uk\/timedilation.htm\u00a0 The Special Theory of Relativity (as developed by Einstein) obtains a set of equations (i.e. the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3377","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-englischsprachige-kritik-der-relativitatstheorie"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3377"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3377"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3377\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3377"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ekkehard-friebe.de\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}