Abstract
DR. FRANK S. CRAWFORD'S further communication1 is welcome as the first attempt to answer my arguments. Hitherto they have been ignored, and independent reasons, which I reject, have been adduced for the opposite conclusion. That leads nowhere.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Nature, 179, 1071 (1957).
See McCrea, Nature, 167, 680 (1951); Discovery, 18, 175 (April 1957).
For example, Nature, 178, 680 (1956); Bull. Inst. Phys., 7, 320 (1956).
Nature, 179, 35 (1957).
Naturwiss., 6, 697 (1918).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
DINGLE, H. The ‘Clock Paradox’ of Relativity. Nature 179, 1242–1243 (1957). https://doi.org/10.1038/1791242a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/1791242a0
This article is cited by
-
The clock paradox in the relativity theory
International Journal of Theoretical Physics (1972)
-
The Clock Paradox in Relativity
Nature (1957)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.