/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9664522
Doesn't help. Whenever you can bring clocks together for a SECOND time, you have a problem, regardless of how it was done. Isn't even necessary for hyperspace travel to be FTL.

Spaceship passes Earth at A at a relative velocity of 0.5 cee. Pilot and ground synchronize clocks at that instant. Who's moving? Doesn't matter. BOTH parties see the other's clock running slow. No preferred inertial frame.

Ship reverses course at B and heads back towards Earth. Doesn't matter if the reversal is made using rockets (which the pilot feels) or by hairpinning around a neutron star (which the pilot doesn't feel.)

Ship passes Earth at C (still doing 0.5 cee, but in the opposite direction now) for the 2nd time and compares clocks. The pilot has aged less. Correct?

<continued>

>>9620313
You are correct. The Alcubierre Drive is supposed to evade relativistic effects.

But that leaves us with the Twin Paradox described in >>9618533. I've drawn a diagram in an attempt to make it clearer. Solid lines are paths taken at, say, half lightspeed.
Clocks can be compared whenever the ship passes Earth, at A C D and G. At each of those points all observers see the "other guy's" clock running slow. At C and G they can compare the elapsed time since the previous pass.
The dotted line from E to F is traversed in Alcubierre drive.

If anyone out there is a genuine authority on Relativistic physics, I'd appreciate them chiming in. I'd really like to know the solution.
Anyone invoking aether, denying Relativity, or claiming space and/or time don't exist -- please be quiet.