Re: What's the beef with Einstein?

From: RP (no_mail_no_spam_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 08/17/04 

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:25:47 -0500

Carlos L wrote:
> RP <no_mail_no_spam@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<2o83u6F7s427U1@uni-berlin.de>...
>
>
>>[...]
>>And then there is the twin paradox. The traveling twin supposedly
>>returns to find his twin has aged more than he.
>>Now suppose they both travel together after this experiment to some
>>distant planet (Planet X) that the traveling twin visited before he
>>returned to Earth. Now here's an enlightening twist to the argument:
>>According to the observers on Planet X, the twins were actually born
>>there, and were then transported to Earth as infants without their
>>knowledge. Moreover, they were actually "triplets", the third having
>>remained on Planet X for the duration. Now from the frame of reference
>>of the inhabitants of Planet X, which has been drifting away from Earth
>>at v for as long as anyone can remember, the stay at home twin (triplet
>>who was the stay at home twin on Earth) will have aged less than the
>>Planet X triplet upon his initial return to Planet X. (This is
>>equivalent to the twin paradox, albeit now from the frame of Planet X)
>>The traveling twin (triplet) will have actually returned to his true
>>home (Planet X) on the outward leg of his journey, and thus during his
>>stay, will have aged more, according to the inhabitants of Planet X,
>>than the Earthbound triplet during that stay, which in turn can be
>>arbitrarily long , i.e. since he is now aging at the same rate as the
>>PanetX inhabitants while the Earth triplet continuous aging less. IOW,
>>The Planet X inhabitants predict that upon the traveling twin's return
>>to Earth on the second leg of his trip, he will be older than his stay
>>at home sibling, rather than younger, which is of course contradictory
>>to what the Earthbound stay at home sibling expects. Thus when afterward
>>they decide to travel together to Planet X, the inhabitants there must
>>find that the traveling twin aged more than the stay at home twin. The
>>twin paradox isn't therefore a paradox, it's a blatant contradiction.
>>[...]
>
>
> Hi Richard:
> I'm interested in understanding that twist of the paradox. I believe
> you have a point there. But I'm having too much trouble understanding
> your description and trying to follow who is who and what travelling
> does he do. If it's not asking too much, could you please repost it
> but, for example, assigning a letter (A,B,C) to each and detailing
> what travelling does every one do.
>
> By the way, I'm also convinced, as you perhaps already know, that SR
> is a bad theory even if it makes many good predictions. It reminds me
> of the epicycles.
>
>
>>[...]
>
>
>>This pitfall is eliminated by the simple postulation of a preferred
>>frame within the context of LET.
>>
>>Richard Perry
>
>
> Best regards
> Carlos L

Thank you Carlos, for your input. Actually there is a much simpler argument.

As you may or may not know, it is assumed that the accelerated sibling
is the one whose clock ticks slow. Now, however, we're going to prove
that this statement cannot be maintained:

Suppose sibling A stays on Earth, a large meteor passes by. Siblings B
and C are transported to it at the moment it passes by. Thus B and C are
now aging less than A, and both frames must agree on this, since it
cannot occur empirically both ways. That is, if B and C both return
together to Earth, then A will be the elder of the three upon their
reunion, and all must agree on this result. We assume that B and C know
that they are the accelerated masses. Now, however, suppose it is only
C that is launched on a ship back to Earth. Then in this case, B must
find, according to the acceleration rule often cited, that C is now
aging slower than he, that is, since C accelerated wrt B, and for all B
knows he is now in a frame that has never accelerated. A, however, is
still aging faster than he, as was determined when we took the Earth as
rest frame. That is, A and C, though now located in the same spot on
Earth, are aging reciprocally of each other wrt B. Thus it would seem,
we've discovered the fountain of youth, just accelerate to some large
fraction of c for a moment or so and return to Earth, you'll then age at
a reduced rate wrt everyone else on Earth from that moment on.

Such arguments have led some to postulate parallel universes, but this
view is plagued with its own set of contradictions.

Consistency can be obtained with the lorentz transform if and only if we
assume a master rest frame and declare all others invalid for use as
rest frames. Or IOW, if we abandon the PoR, which obviously poses its
own contradiction. Bottom line, the lorentz transformation is invalid.

Lorentz's original approach, i.e. of physical alterations to moving
masses, can account for all of the experimental data, without logical
inconsistencies.

OTOH, Seto may possibly have a valid alternative that agrees with the
experimental data, but I haven't analyzed it closely enough to judge it.

Here's another freebie. Note that every massive object is composed of
particles, none of which occupy the same frame as their host object. Can
you account for such a mass maintaining its integrity for any duration
with the lorentz transform in play? IOW, will the same end result be
obtained if we track each and every particle through space-time as when
tracking their center of mass? I can't see it happening. The particles
of a clock would necessarily age much less than the clock itself, which
statement can be seen to be quite contradictory if given even a minimum
of thought.

Richard Perry

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Whats the beef with Einstein?
    ... > And then there is the twin paradox. ... The traveling twin supposedly ... > distant planet that the traveling twin visited before he ... > equivalent to the twin paradox, albeit now from the frame of Planet X) ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Time dilatation and a space referential
    ... >> If I got it right, the faster you go, the slower time goes for you. ... this paradox, one twin stays on earth, while another does a high speed ... youngest once the two would meet, because he would be the one traveling ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Trying figure it out - time dilation
    ... Time dilation is a paradox only when it is not understood. ... one twin has to leave Earth and then return to it before the ... One twin gets in a spaceship parked on Earth, ... and leaves the planet on a trip and some time later returns to Earth. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • my shy profession wont command before I resolve it
    ... ridge of the Earth in what must have been the Western ... straight in front of me. ... had much experience of astral traveling I felt pangs of ... to hit that planet it would not hurt them or us. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Spaceship Question
    ... >>> you saying that this effect is not due to the GPS clock change its ... the earth clock would be seen by the GPS observer to be ... traveling twin is in inertial motion, that the earth twin's clock is ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Quantcast