Re: Discarding Relativity: the twin paradox and Schrodinger's cat


"PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:fb990999-8dff-434a-836f-3a34c24cc98b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 26, 12:09 pm, Albertito <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 26 feb, 17:03, "Paul B. Andersen"





<paul.b.ander...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Albertito wrote:
On 26 feb, 14:44, "Androcles" <Headmas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Albertito" <albertito1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:c9d9cb79-fe7f-4c8d-adbd-619368476871@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| I'm going to prove that when the travelling twin B returns
| close to twin A at rest, he is younger than A, and A is
| younger than B, too. It is saying the twin paradox and
| Schrodinger's cat are actually the same phenomenon!.
|
| Special Relativty is just a naive theory trying to describe a
| quantum phenomenon known as quantum superposition.
| Quantum kinematics is the correct framework for accounting
| for the so-called relativistic motions.
|
| The fact that moving B's clock would run slower than A's
| clock at rest, is a typical case of quantum superposition,
| because there is a symmetry telling us that, in proper B's
| frame, it is moving A's clock that runs slower. For systems
| which interact continuously with their environments, quantum
| decoherence resolves the superposition of states providing
| a mechanism for wave function collapses to take place.
|
Where's the proof?

The proof is as follows:
Consider two clocks, A and B, synchronized at rest,
Now, keep them isolated from environment, say in two
sealed boxes, where we can't observe them running.
Now, move one box in inertial motion wrt the other, at
speed v>0. According to SR, A clock is now running
faster than B clock, in proper A's frame, but B clock is
also running faster than A clock in proper B's frame.
If both clocks have remained isolated, preserved from
any eventual perturbation. then when you approach
both boxes to be at rest close together, there wouldn't
be a twin paradox, but a Schrodinger's cat paradox.
A clock would show a time t_a, and B clock a time
t_b, such that t_a< t_b and t_b< t_a, but t_a < > t_b.
A clock marks two different times simultaneously, and
B clock, too.
Isn't that phenomenon a quantum superposition of states?.
When you open one of those sealed boxes, a quantum
decoherence is produced, so you can observe one of
those clocks shows a unique time, and instantaneously
the time on the other clock is fixed as unique too.

Most cranks reinvent the same 'proof that SR is wrong"
over and over.
But you have invented a brand new approach, so idiotic
that no other crank has thought of it.
Congratulations!

If it is a joke, I went right into it. :-)
It was superb.

--
Paul

http://home.c2i.net/pb_andersen/

Of course it is a joke. What is science but a joke?
Most interesting approaches (theories/hypothesis)
that actually work started being crank ideas, jokes,
gedankenexperiments, games. Do you agree? :-)

| As a follow-up,

We don't need any follow-ups, drunken heckle ignored.
See Smiffy, he'll love you, "Dear" Duck.



.

Relevant Pages