A SYMMETRICAL TIME RESOLUTION OF THE CLOCK PARADOX

Citation
D. Brough et Ad. Rivers, A SYMMETRICAL TIME RESOLUTION OF THE CLOCK PARADOX, Physics essays, 11(2), 1998, pp. 200-212
Citations number
14
Categorie Soggetti
Physics
Journal title
ISSN journal
08361398
Volume
11
Issue
2
Year of publication
1998
Pages
200 - 212
Database
ISI
SICI code
0836-1398(1998)11:2<200:ASTROT>2.0.ZU;2-2
Abstract
The clock paradox arising from the special theory of relativity contin ues to puzzle and confuse some of the scientific community. The Establ ishment view is that there is no problem and that the theory predicts that time dilation of moving bodies results in asymmetric aging. It is also claimed that there is conclusive evidence for this in (I) the ex tended lifetimes of high-velocity meson beams, and (2) the observed di fferences in recorded times between clocks that have been flown around the Earth compared with those that have remained on the ground. On th e other hand, there are a number of scientists who still do not accept this interpretation of the ''conclusive evidence'' and are led to que stion the validity of the special theory of relativity. The authors of the present paper accept special relativity theory, but argue that it s correct interpretation does not lead to asymmetric aging. The genera lly accepted resolution of the clock paradox is set out, objections to this accepted resolution are made, and an alternative resolution is p resented. The evidence for asymmetric aging is examined. The alternati ve explanation allowing time dilation to occur without invoking asymme tric aging hinges on the tenet of special relativity theory that event s simultaneous for one observer will not generally be simultaneous for another observer moving with high relative velocity. Taking this into account, the apparent asymmetric aging effects disappear. Existing ex perimental evidence in the behavior of decelerated cosmic rays support s this explanation. In addition, it is argued that the accepted interp retation of the results of the celebrated ''around-the-world flying cl ocks'' experiment is in error and that the correct interpretation of t hese results supports the present authors' explanation.