Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!heathcliff.columbia.edu!zdenek
From: zdenek@heathcliff.columbia.edu (Zdenek Radouch)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Accelerating elevator (and twin "paradox" explained once more)
Message-ID: <3904@columbia.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Nov-86 23:38:43 EST
Article-I.D.: columbia.3904
Posted: Sun Nov 23 23:38:43 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 24-Nov-86 21:05:45 EST
References: <230@sri-arpa.ARPA> <572@epimass.UUCP>
Sender: nobody@columbia.UUCP
Reply-To: zdenek@heathcliff.columbia.edu.UUCP (Zdenek Radouch)
Followup-To: sci.physics
Distribution: net
Organization: Columbia University CS Department
Lines: 30
Summary: Well, that depends on your group...

In article <706@dg_rtp.UUCP> throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP (Wayne Throop) writes:
>> [somebody about twin paradox]
>> My high school physics isn't letting me in on the secret...
>
>My college physics DOES let me in on the secret... but just how many
>times should I post the same thing over and over?  Well, maybe just once
>more...

I don't think the problem with understanding relativistic physics is
as simple as you put it. To be more precise I don't think there are too
many people around who DO KNOW how to use space-time diagrams and at the
same time CAN'T EXPLAIN the twin paradox.
My guess is that there are two big groups with the following comments:

1. Why the hell does he repeat this over ond over?
2. Why the hell does he repeat this over ond over?

The first group is annoyed because they don't learn anything new, whereas
the second group is annoyed because they don't learn anything new, too.

Oh, I almost forgot to say that the first group understands the problem
and the second doesn't. So I am not sure about your "one more explanation".

zdenek

P.S.
Could anybody who didn't understand the twin paradox and does understand
it now as a result of Wayne's article please raise hand and say I'm wrong?

 zdenek@cs.columbia.edu  or 	...!seismo!columbia!cs!zdenek