What can a reasonable person do if the officially accepted theory
claims that the greenness of the crocodile exceeds its length? Should
one try to prove that the length exceeds the greenness? And if the
officially accepted theory claims that both the greenness exceeds the
length and the length exceeds the greenness?
According to Einstein's theory, the youthfulness of the travelling
twin both has nothing to do with the acceleration she has suffered and
is entirely caused by the acceleration she has suffered:
http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions, David
Morin, Cambridge University Press, Chapter 11, p. 14: "Example (Twin
paradox): Twin A stays on the earth, while twin B flies quickly to a
distant star and back. Show that B is younger than A when they meet up
again. (...) For the entire outward and return parts of the trip, B
does observe A's clock running slow, but enough strangeness occurs
during the turning-around period to make A end up older. Note,
however, that a discussion of acceleration is not required to
quantitatively understand the paradox, as Problem 11.2 shows."
http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/members/gibbons/gwgPartI_SpecialRelativity2010.pdf
Gary W. Gibbons FRS: "In other words, by simply staying at home Jack
has aged relative to Jill. There is no paradox because the lives of
the twins are not strictly symmetrical. This might lead one to suspect
that the accelerations suffered by Jill might be responsible for the
effect. However this is simply not plausible because using identical
accelerating phases of her trip, she could have travelled twice as
far. This would give twice the amount of time gained."
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a909857880
Peter Hayes "The Ideology of Relativity: The Case of the Clock
Paradox" : Social Epistemology, Volume 23, Issue 1 January 2009, pages
57-78: Albert Einstein wrote in 1911: "The [travelling] clock runs
slower if it is in uniform motion, but if it undergoes a change of
direction as a result of a jolt, then the theory of relativity does
not tell us what happens. The sudden change of direction might produce
a sudden change in the position of the hands of the clock. However,
the longer the clock is moving rectilinearly and uniformly with a
given speed in a forward motion, i.e., the larger the dimensions of
the polygon, the smaller must be the effect of such a hypothetical
sudden change."
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/spacetime_tachyon/index.html
John Norton: "Then, at the end of the outward leg, the traveler
abruptly changes motion, accelerating sharply to adopt a new inertial
motion directed back to earth. What comes now is the key part of the
analysis. The effect of the change of motion is to alter completely
the traveler's judgment of simultaneity. The traveler's hypersurfaces
of simultaneity now flip up dramatically. Moments after the turn-
around, when the travelers clock reads just after 2 days, the traveler
will judge the stay-at-home twin's clock to read just after 7 days.
That is, the traveler will judge the stay-at-home twin's clock to have
jumped suddenly from reading 1 day to reading 7 days. This huge jump
puts the stay-at-home twin's clock so far ahead of the traveler's that
it is now possible for the stay-at-home twin's clock to be ahead of
the travelers when they reunite."
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dialog_about_objections_against_the_theory_of_relativity
Dialog about Objections against the Theory of Relativity (1918), by
Albert Einstein: "...according to the special theory of relativity the
coordinate systems K and K' are by no means equivalent systems. Indeed
this theory asserts only the equivalence of all Galilean
(unaccelerated) coordinate systems, that is, coordinate systems
relative to which sufficiently isolated, material points move in
straight lines and uniformly. K is such a coordinate system, but not
the system K', that is accelerated from time to time. Therefore, from
the result that after the motion to and fro the clock U2 is running
behind U1, no contradiction can be constructed against the principles
of the theory. (...) During the partial processes 2 and 4 the clock
U1, going at a velocity v, runs indeed at a slower pace than the
resting clock U2. However, this is more than compensated by a faster
pace of U1 during partial process 3. According to the general theory
of relativity, a clock will go faster the higher the gravitational
potential of the location where it is located, and during partial
process 3 U2 happens to be located at a higher gravitational potential
than U1. The calculation shows that this speeding ahead constitutes
exactly twice as much as the lagging behind during the partial
processes 2 and 4. This consideration completely clears up the paradox
that you brought up."
Clearly Einstein's theory is not just absurd. It is much more than
that.
Pentcho Valev
pva...@yahoo.com