Re: Langevin's paradox again

Le 14/07/2024 à 19:07, "Paul.B.Andersen" a écrit :

Den 14.07.2024 04:02, skrev Richard Hachel:

I accept your definition of the scenario.
I will assume that the 24 hours are included in the 18 years,
and the 40 hours are included in the 30 years.

What do you mean by "complete explanation"?

By this I mean that the explanation given by physicists is correct, but very incomplete.
They say, like you, like me, that Stella will come back at the age of 18,
and Terrence will be 30 years old.
They are obviously right.
If we carry the problem even more precisely, and we introduce a small acceleration phase, we can even say that Stella will be 18 years and 24 hours old, and that Terrence will be 30 years and 40 hours old.
Of course, there will always be people who think otherwise. Here, on this forum, there is Maciej who thinks that Stella will be the same age as Terrence, that is to say 30 years and 40 hours for both of them. In France, Richard Verret and Yanick Toutain think the same thing, but they are wrong.
But being certain that you are right, that Doctor Hachel is right, that the physicists are right, that is not enough.
We must explain why correctly and with essential mathematical precision.
And there, a problem arises: only Richard Hachel can break down the evolution, observer by observer, segments by segments whatever they may be. Neither physicists nor Paul B. Andersen can do it.
 Their explanation is therefore true, but very incomplete.
R.H.