Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-26T21:11:23.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Clock Paradox: Some New Thoughts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Richard Schlegel
Richard Schlegel*
Affiliation:
Michigan State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Discussion
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , June 1977 , pp. 306 - 312
Copyright
Copyright © 1977 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

Much of the mathematical detail of the paradox resolution of this paper had its origin in discussions with Dr. George Stranahan, and I am indebted to him for his helpful and critical persistence toward a solution. I thank Prof. Sir Brian Pippard for kindly extending to me during the year 1975–1976 the hospitality of the Cavendish Laboratory, where this paper was written.

References

REFERENCES

Aurilia, A. and Rohrlich, F. “Invariant Relative Velocity.” American Journal of Physics 43 (1975): 261–264.10.1119/1.10066CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hafele, J. C. and Keating, R. E. “Around-the-World Atomic Clocks.” Science 177 (1972): 166–170.10.1126/science.177.4044.166CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halsbury, . “Space Travel and Aging.” Discovery 18 (1957): 174.Google Scholar
Little, E. M. “Two Simpler Relativity Twin Paradoxes.” American Journal of Physics 33 (1965): 747–748.10.1119/1.1972232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowry, E. S. “The Clock Paradox.” American Journal of Physics 31 (1963): 59.10.1119/1.1969239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marder, L. Time and the Space-Traveller. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1971.Google Scholar
Misner, C. W., Thorne, K. S., and Wheeler, J. A. Gravitation. San Francisco: Freeman, 1973. Page 65.Google Scholar
Muller, R. A. “The Twin Paradox in Special Relativity.” American Journal of Physics 40 (1972): 966–971.10.1119/1.1986722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pound, R. V. and Rebka, G. A. “Apparent Weight of Photons.” Physical Review Letters 4 (1960): 337–341.10.1103/PhysRevLett.4.337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, W. C. Space, Time, and Motion. Encino, California: Dickenson, 1975.Google Scholar
Schlegel, R. “An Interaction Interpretation of Special Relativity Theory.” Foundations of Physics 3 (1973): 169–184 and 277–295.10.1007/BF00708437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlegel, R. Time and the Physical World. New York: Dover, 1968.Google Scholar
Schlegel, R. “Comments on the Hafele-Keating Experiment.” American Journal of Physics 42 (1974): 183–187.10.1119/1.1987645CrossRefGoogle Scholar