• Who am I?

    I am Qrystal; or at least, that's my dot-name! Har har. (My name is really Crystal, but that's not as internet-searchable; hence, switching the C for the little-used letter Q.)

    I am here because I enjoy writing. I do this mostly for myself, but I also have a passion for helping others learn things from the things I write. Now that I am done my Ph.D. in Physics, I am stepping away from academic research so that I can indulge in some creative ways to share my knowledge and inspire the appreciation of scientific thinking in others. I am also working as a tutor, which is one of the jobs I've most enjoyed doing in my life so far.

  • Post Categories

  • Archives

  • Meta

  • Relativity and its non-paradoxes

    Posted by Qrystal on May 13, 2009 at 11:27.
    Category: Concepts. Tags: physics, relativity.

    The Clock Paradox illustrates how relativity theory does indeed contain inconsistencies that make it scientifically problematic.

    So says Dr Peter Hayes, a senior lecturer in politics (yes, politics), as quoted in an article at Science Centric entitled
    “Has Einstein failed physics?”

    I am getting really sick and tired of people trying to bring down Einstein. First it was SCIAM with their cover article, “Was Einstein Wrong?” when in fact the article was showing that Einstein’s doubts about quantum mechanics may actually be right. The original title of the article was just “A Quantum Threat to Special Relativity”, but some editor thought it would be cool to make it seem like Einstein was wrong. Einstein knew quantum mechanics was inconsistent with relativity, which is why he was so adamant that quantum theory was incomplete!

    This time, I’m borderline furious that some supposedly “science-centric” website is even POSTING something by someone studying POLITICS and claiming that the theory of relativity is just a mere ideology. Relativity has been verified by experiments, including the aspect of time dilation, which is the mechanism behind the so-called Clock Paradox mentioned in the quote above.

    But let me quote how the “science-centric” article describes this Clock Paradox:

    “…if one clock travels in a spaceship, while the other stays on earth, when the clock in the spaceship returns it will show that less time has elapsed than the clock on earth. This prediction violates Einstein’s own ‘principle of relativity,’ which states that if you are on the spaceship it should be the clock back on earth that slows down. This is a criticism that science has never been able to satisfactorily resolve.

    Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit! And I don’t swear often, only when the situation demands it. This situation demanded that I swear thrice! Grrr!

    What actually happens in this so-called Clock Paradox is that the spaceship has to decelerate and accelerate in order to make the return trip. This breaks the symmetry between the two frames of reference. If this symmetry-breaking didn’t happen, say the spaceship was just zooming past Earth and there was some way to compare clock rates, both parties would see that the other’s clock is slow. Thus, in frames with very high relative velocities, there is a disagreement in clock rates, and that’s it! However, if one frame decelerates to meet the speed of the other, relativity can predict exactly what the resulting difference in time duration will be. This is not only “satisfactorily resolved” in science, it’s completely consistent, at least until you try and analyze it without enough background in the subject!

    This is just more proof that I need to get out there and fight for true science to be known, instead of this ideology bullshit…

    No Comments »