Indian Journal of Physics

, Volume 86, Issue 10, pp 937–942 | Cite as

Relativity solution for “Twin paradox”: a comprehensive solution

Short Research Communication
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

We have provided a complete and realistic solution to the problem of Twin Paradox, for the first time, in the frame work of general relativity. Some of the inspiration for this paper has come from the well known papers by Linet and Teyssandier (Phys Rev D 66:024045, 2002) discussing objects moving on geodesics for more general metrics than Schwarzschild. The subject of the “Twin paradox” is encountered frequently in relativity classes but a complete solution in the general relativity framework is not being taught. Our approaches have covered all the cases, starting with inertial motion in flat space time, going through hyperbolic motion in flat space time and ending with the treatment for curved space time.

Keywords

Twin paradox Schwarzschild metric Hyperbolic motion 

PACS Nos.

03.30.+p 04.20.−q 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. [1]
    R Perrin Am. J. Phys. 44 317 (1970)Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    B R Holstein and A R Swift Am. J. Phys. 40 746 (1972)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    J C Haefele and R E Keating Science 177 168 (1972)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    S P Boughton Am. J. Phys. 57 791 (1989)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    T Dray Am. J. Phys. 58 822 (1990)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    M A Vandyck Found. Phys. Lett. 4 6 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    T A Debs and M L G Redhead Am. J. Phys. 64 384 (1996)MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    R P Gruber and R H Price Am. J. Phys. 65 979 (1997)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    P Chaudhary and B S Rajput Indian J. Phys. 85 1843 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    R J Low Eur. J. Phys. 16 228 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    M B Cranor, E M Heider and R H Price Am. J. Phys. 68 11 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    J Uzan et al Eur. J. Phys. 23 277 (2002)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    P Pesic Eur. J. Phys. 24 585 (2003)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    E Minguzzi Am. J. Phys, 73 876 (2005)MathSciNetADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    L Iorio Found. Phys.Lett. 18 1 (2005)MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    P Jones and L Wanex Found. Phys.Lett. 19 1 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    J A Winnie Phylos. Sci. 37 (1968)Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    B Linet and P Teyssandier Phys. Rev. D 66 024045 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    A Sfarti Nuovo Cimento B 125 12 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    D S Wamalwa and J A Omolo Indian J. Phys. 84 1241 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Association for the Cultivation of Science 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations