Letter | Published:

The Clock Paradox in Relativity

Nature volume 180, pages 12751276 (07 December 1957) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

As I have repeatedly pointed out, symmetrical ageing in this problem is an inevitable requirement of the postulate of relativity. I have given tne argument in the simplest possible form1 in order to facilitate refutation if it is indeed wrong. I therefore find it inexplicable that Sir Charles Darwin2, while completely ignoring this argument (in which he is at one with all other critics), can write that “the accepted theory of relativity ċ quite definitely implies that a space-traveller will return from his journey younger than his stay-at-home twin brother”. His reason for this assertion appears to be identical with that of Dr. J. H. Fremlin, on which I have already commented3. Since that comment appears to have been inadequate, I will consider the problem posed in more detail, in order to bring out what I believe to be the misconception underlying such arguments as that of Sir Charles Darwin.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    Nature, 179, 1242 (1957).

  2. 2.

    Nature, 180, 976 (1957).

  3. 3.

    Nature, 180, 499 (1957).

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Purley, Surrey.

    • HERBERT DINGLE

Authors

  1. Search for HERBERT DINGLE in:

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/1801275b0

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.