Twin paradox alone kills special relativity

[kenn2010]

twin paradox alone kills special relativity:

the story:

A stays on the planet, B round-travels by spaceship;
when back, based on spectral relativity, B youngs.



analysis:
when special relativity is be applied, the property difference between planet and spaceship is never used; so, first let's simplify the paradox, to avoid confusions to some easily confused minds, that:

A stays in the spaceship 1, B round-travels by spaceship 2;
when back, based on special relativity, B youngs.


Now, the above judgement based on special relativity is made from the standpoint of A & spaceship 1, that B & spaceship 2 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on.

however, if from the standpoint of B, then A & spaceship 1 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on; then, also based on the great theory of einstein's special relativity, we conclude A will be younger.



So...

Based on the same the great theory of einstein's special relativity, we could conclude B to be younger when they meet again, and we can conclude A to be younger when they meet again.




So...

the great theory of einstein's special relativity is fundamentally flawed;
and any theory or theorem or equation building on this foundation, must be re-examinated.






As a matter of fact, borrowing the spirit of "relativity", A and B are completely symmetric,

so...

of course, when back, A and B must be of the same age. any theory predict one of the twin younger than the other must the wrong.

 

[andron2000]

The idea behind the twin paradox is at first this anti-symmetry of age happens, when in fact through the analysis of SR, we have to take into account the acceleration and deceleration of the spaceship. The problem with the paradox is that the rules of SR are applied blindly, without considering the acceleration effects. If proper relativity is applied everything works. SR is not flawed in this sense it is that the non-inertial frames of acceleration/deceleration were not involved. You need to re-examine the paradox by involving those frames.

 

[bcrowell]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox#Resolution_of_the_paradox_in_special_relativity

 

[kenn2010]

andron2000, I don't know what you are talking about. read my post again, again,... then look at your own replay again.

 

[Dead Boss]

however, if from the standpoint of B, then A & spaceship 1 experience acceleration & decceleration and so on;

No. Acceleration is NOT relative and the frame of accelerating observer is not inertial.

 

[ZikZak]

Usually, when a person doesn't understand a complex thing, they scratch their heads and say something like, "I don't get it," or "Could someone explain this."

Only with Relativity, it seems, do the ignorant regularly claim that they've been able to disprove all of modern physics. Why is that? Does it have something to do with a need to demonstrate that one is equal to or superior to a particular person, Einstein (you've disparaged him multiple times)? I think there is a lot to be learned here in the field of psychology.

 

[Mentz114]

so,

kenn2010, you don't know what you are talking about. Go and find out before making ridiculous sweeping statements.

Only with Relativity, it seems, do the ignorant regularly claim that they've been able to disprove all of modern physics. Why is that? Does it have something to do with a need to demonstrate that one is equal to or superior to a particular person, Einstein (you've disparaged him multiple times)? I think there is a lot to be learned here in the field of psychology.

Good point.

 

[andron2000]

Kenn, The point I am making is your analysis is wrong. Dead Boss pointed out that acceleration is not an inertial frame. You have to learn how to incorporate those into your analysis to resolve these types of paradox. SR is real subtle on how you have to approach the problem, you have to think your way through every possible detail before making claims.

 

[kenn2010]

case 1: in the frame of A, A and B are not symmetric.
case 2: in the frame of B, A and B are not symmetric.

but in the more outer loop, case 1 and case 2 are completely symmetric.

so, any unsymmetric prediction is wrong. any theory predicts wrong prediction is fundamentally flawed.

mans, just wake up, don't waste your life. fix this fundamental bug first, then move on.

 

[jtbell]

kenn, please read the sticky post at the top of this forum:

IMPORTANT! Read before posting