Twin paradox
Name
Institution

A thought experiment is an assessment that considers a principle with the aim of thinking through its repercussions. Through the thought experiments, it may be possible to perform an experiment or not and if an experiment can be performed there need to be no intention of performing the experiment. It is intended to mainly explore the principle in question’s consequences. It is a means through which one does an intentional and structured process of intellectual deliberation in order to find with a specifiable domain about potential antecedents for a designated antecedent. Twin paradox is my topic of discussion in this article. It can be described as a thought experiment in unique relativity involving identical twins. One twin (A.J.Paquette, 2013) makes journey to the space and after returning home, he found that the other twin had become of age. The outcome is thus puzzling since each twins views the other to be moving. This can thus be asserted as incorrect application of principle of relativity and dilation in time. A conclusion can be made that each of the twins should have seen the other to be ageing more slowly. This scenario however, can be explained within the principle of special relativity which implies: the trajectory of travelling twins requires two different inertial frames which are one for the inwards journey and another one for the migrating journey. The twin refutation is thus not a self contradiction in the sense of logical contradiction. There has been many explanation to this paradox which was started with Paul langevin in 1911. According to his explanation, they can be classified into those that are designated by acceleration “experienced by travelling twin and the ones focusing on the effects of various simultaneity standards in different frames. The ones that designated (Jeansonne, 2006)the acceleration were used by Max Von Laue to argue that the separate twins were in separate internal frame “one outwards and one inwards”, the change in frame was as a result of the aging difference. Further explanations were put forth by Max Born and Albert Einstein that appealed gravitational time dilation to account for acceleration as the direct cause of aging. The twin paradox has been validated experimentally by measurements of atomic clocks steered in aircrafts and satellites. For instance, special relativity and gravitational time dilation together have been used to account the Hafele-Keating experiment. It was also verified in particle accelerators by quantifying time dilation of circulating particle beams. Albert Einstein in his famous work on special relativity predicted that when two clocks were brought together and integrated, one brought back after being displaced, the clock which had been displaced would appear to be behind the clock which had stayed put. He considered this to be a consequence of special relativity rather than paradox as some claimed in 1911. Albert restated that if we place a living creature in a box, it was possible to organize that , after any given span of time , the living creature could be taken (Thorson, 2011) back to its initial spot in a scarcely altered Condon, while corresponding creatures which had remained in their initial positions had already long since given path to new genesis. For the vacating creature, the span of time of the journey was a mere imperative, given that the displacement took place with almost the same speed of light. In comparison of stationary creature to be man and the moving one to be the twin, it can be argued that the traveler returns home to find the twin brother much aged in comparison to himself. The conclusion is based on the argument that, ralating, each of the twins could refer to the other as traveler, in which case either should find the other younger which is a logical refutation. This dissension hypothesize that the twins’ situation are interchangeable and asymmetrical which is a hypothesis which is not correct.
Other experiments have been done to support Einstein’s prediction and one example was done by Paul Langevin. He described the story of a traveler who used speed like that of light as an example. After wavering in a projectile for one year, the traveler reverses to a different direction. On returning, he finds out that when 200 years have passed on earth he has aged by two years. In the course of the experiment, the earth and the traveler keeps sending signals to each other at a fixed rate. The signal’s purpose is to account for the different momentums of aging. The argument is that it’s the vacationer who goes (Richardson, 2014) acceleration which gives asymmetry that explains the differences “acceleration or any change of velocity” which has an absolute meaning. Moreover, Max Von Laue in 1911 elaborated the concept of Langevin further. He used the Minkowski’s space time formalism to demonstrate that the world lines of the internally moving figures capitalize the proper time elapsed between two events. He also asserted that the asymmetric aging is completely accounted for by the fact that the spacemen twin transit in two separate frames. The earth duplicate remains in one frame and the time of expedition can be made arbitrary small in comparison to the time of inertial motion. Both Einstein and Langevin did not consider the results to be literally anomalous. Einstein called it ordinary whereas Langevin explained it to be a consequence of absolute acceleration. Based on the discipline of science, a paradox can be said to be results that are inherently contradictory and both Langevin and Einstein argued that in the story of two twins no such self contradiction can be created. Both men saw the story of the twins as consisting self-consistency of relativistic physics.

References
A.J.Paquette. (2013). Paradox. New York: Random House Books for Young Readers.
Jeansonne, G. (2006). A Time of Paradox: America Since 1890. Washington Dc: Rowman & Littlefield.
Richardson, A. (2014). A Twin's Paradox (Family Reunion Book 2). Ashland Oregon: Audio book publishing.
Thorson, S. (2011). The Twins Paradox [Kindle Edition]. New York: Arch Media LLC.