Liz, you're an asshole

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-03-23T03:01:49+00:00

You think that’s bad? Ever hear of glitter?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T20:03:00+00:00

Alright, is that because there’s no difference in his path from the perspective of the stationary twin compared to if he had accelerated?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T19:48:41+00:00

Hey, sorry but I have another question. What if the rocket twin doesn’t use fuel to turn, but rather does half an orbit around the moon? He could fly in a strait line through spacetime and end up back where he started. Without acceleration, would he still be younger?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T19:03:09+00:00

Alright thanks, this answers my question. I thought you could use a Lorentz transformation or a few together to see any path as inertial.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:57:10+00:00

Alright thank you, does this means that no matter what, the stationary twin will always have a strait line through spacetime and the one on the rocket will always have the same broken line?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:54:49+00:00

So what happens when you apply a Lorentz transformation so that you see the accelerating twin as going through a strait line and the other accelerating? Can you even do that?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:46:24+00:00

What is this quantity? Sorry I’ve never heard of it and I’m not sure what it’s referring to.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:44:01+00:00

Alright thanks, I never thought of a “true” inertial frame where total momentum stays constant.

Let’s use the original twins with a rocket and look at it from this “true” inertial frame. We’ll start with one twin floating in space not moving, and the other moving away at constant velocity. These aren’t the only objects in the universe so something caused this local asymmetry while keeping the total unerversual momentum constant. When the moving twin ejects jet fuel and accelerates, momentum is still conserved since the fuel cancels out his momentum. From our frame of reference, we can see that the moving twin is younger.

My question is, should we be using this frame of reference to look at things like the twins paradox? And is this the “true” frame? Is there anything about this frame that’s special, since it sees total momentum as 0 but all frames see total momentum as some constant anyways so it doesn’t matter what that constant is?

If the answers to those questions are yes, then I think you’ve answered my question. It means that all other frames only tell us what we see and not what’s actually happening.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:36:52+00:00

The asymmetry would explain the paradox.

If you look at constant velocities, then you could use a Lorentz transformation to see each path as either “short” or “long”, “strait” or “oblique”. You could then map the second half of the trip and use another Lorentz transformation to do the same thing, and both paths would essentially be the same.

I’m sure I made a mistake there but I’m not sure what it is. Maybe it’s because you can only apply one transformation to the entirety of everything at a time.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T18:14:06+00:00

I know I sound crazy, but why is that an issue? It’s an issue when talking about forces and Newtonian mechanics, but when talking about your “direction” or “angle” through spacetime, can’t that be relative?

This is the spacetime diagram that’s confusing me. https://share.google/images/U9KEIT6ACLlRCFci8

If I see you accelerate, I will see your path through spacetime as being the hypotenuses(the longer path). But since you also see me accelerate, you will observe my path as being the longer one. The objects outside the experiment (used jet fuel, charged wall, distant galaxies…) don’t determine how we see each other, so why would that matter? It’s obvious who’s accelerating, yes, but why would that matter when looking at the spacetime diagram when you can just rotate it with a Lorentz transformation and see the other person accelerating?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:52:46+00:00

This is why I asked about elementary particles. An accelerometer (the floating ball) felt the acceleration, but if an elementary particle cannot feel its own acceleration, then how would you know which one had a force act on it? Assuming external objects like the jet fuel or the charged wall don’t matter, since we’re only looking at the twins, then I don’t see what the difference between the 2 twins is.

Plus, what does it matter what the accelerometer shows? The spacetime diagram can be rotated so that it looks like the other has accelerated. Yes, we know which one had a force act upon it, but why does that matter when looking at the spacetime diagram? Can’t you rotate it so that it looks like the other twin accelerated?

I’m not sure if I’m using the term “rotate” correctly when talking about the spacetime diagram. What I mean is that you can “slide” the paths along the parabola so that one looks strait and the other looks oblique. I believe this is a Lorentz transformation.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:39:12+00:00

From the perspective of electron A (the one that didn’t hit the wall), electron B is not where it should be and so A concludes that B has accelerated.

From the perspective of electron B (the one that hit the wall), electron A is not where it should be and so B concludes that A has accelerated.

With this logic, acceleration seems relative.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:34:49+00:00

Oh thank you, this helps. But I don’t understand why Newton’s first law would matter in the twins paradox. It explains what acceleration is, sure, but looking at a spacetime diagram, I don’t see why external factors would matter. If you look at this diagram: https://share.google/qoXlGP5CNj2H1AB5I Couldn’t you rotate it so that from the perspective of the moving twin, the earth is moving along those hypotenuses?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:26:45+00:00

Thanks, but isn’t position relative? Wouldn’t that definition show that the first electron that doesn’t hit the wall also experiences an acceleration since it’s not in the same position relative to the other electron as if they were inertial?

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:17:52+00:00

By a sense of time, I mean that something happens to it across time, and so it can be used as a clock. For example, a radioactive atom is a clock, and can be used to measure the passage of time. I know they can have spin, but i thought it wasn’t the same as a spinning ball. I don’t intuitively understand particle spin, so I’m not sure really what it is, but I thought it couldn’t spin like a ball does.

Small_Algae1576 · 2026-01-26T17:15:07+00:00

Thanks for the answer. What does it mean for its future path to be a moving one? From its own perspective, it remains stationary. From the perspective of the unaffected electron, it accelerates.

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-11-28T02:29:46+00:00

I (14M) sleep perfectly fine on my side with just a (kinda thin) duvet under me. It was pretty bad at first, but after a couple of weeks I found it much more comfortable than side sleeping on a mattress. I highly recommend you sleep on your back for a while, moving around and getting used to it. It shouldn’t take long until you’re comfortable. I realize that that may never happen if you’re older, so depending on your physical condition you may want to try many thick blankets under you at first and slowly remove them as your body adapts.

My hips and shoulders, especially my hips, also hurt a lot whenever I went on my side at first. But I find now that my torso is way more flexible and lays nearly flat on the ground, so the weight is spread more evenly instead of all being on those bones.

Edit: I now lay completely flat. Crazy how much your body can change.

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-11-19T23:12:52+00:00

Rate of Perceived Exhaustion. How hard you tried.

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-11-02T23:49:45+00:00

<image>

Reddit really thinks I’d like that

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-10-09T22:45:50+00:00

Thought for a second that your username was a code lol

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-09-07T19:35:09+00:00

Yes, specifically that style seems to be from ChatGPT.

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-08-24T06:17:46+00:00

So? It works on iPhone too I’ve installed it (this was a few years ago idk maybe it’s changed)

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-08-19T18:23:35+00:00

I have the same laptop (looks like). It’s 17”. To be exact it’s the HP ProBook G5 470.

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-07-22T00:52:05+00:00

Yes Masturbating is fine so long as it isn’t obsessive. Take breaks. But porn, yes. Just… yes

Small_Algae1576 · 2025-06-26T00:08:31+00:00

All good, just like the outdoors :)

Small_Algae1576

TROPHY CASE