TWIN PARADOX: DOES ACCELERATION MATTER?

Here is a thought experiment that I am going to modify a little:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn63xl6GV-E

The travel of one of the spaceships remains unchanged but the acceleration involved in the turn-around will be avoided for the second spaceship. There is a third spaceship which moves with speed v towards the station so that, at the moment the second spaceship was to undergo turn-around and acceleration, the third spaceship passes the second and sets its clock to read the same as the second's. ( This elimination of the acceleration is well known and can be found in textbooks - see 11.19. Modified twin paradox on p. 44 in http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf ). Finally, the first and the third spaceships arrive simultaneously at the station. Do their clocks show the same time?

Clever Einsteinians know that both the "yes" and the "no" answers are fatal for relativity. The consequences of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate are inherently contradictory.

Pentcho Valev

Doublethink in Einsteiniana is different from (classical) doublethink in Big Brother's world. In classical doublethink truth and lie coexist:

http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17
"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary."

Doublethink in Einsteiniana means the power of holding two contradictory interpretations of the same lie in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. Truth does not exist at all. So 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.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/...tivity2010.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/con...ent=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/teachi...yon/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...f_rela tivity
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."

Pentcho Valev

On Oct 27, 8:22*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Here is a thought experiment that I am going to modify a little:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn63xl6GV-E

The travel of one of the spaceships remains unchanged but the acceleration involved in the turn-around will be avoided for the second spaceship. There is a third spaceship which moves with speed v towards the station so that, at the moment the second spaceship was to undergo turn-around and acceleration, the third spaceship passes the second and sets its clock to read the same as the second's. ( This elimination of the acceleration is well known and can be found in textbooks - see 11.19. Modified twin paradox on p. 44 inhttp://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/chap11.pdf). Finally, the first and the third spaceships arrive simultaneously at the station. Do their clocks show the same time?

Clever Einsteinians know that both the "yes" and the "no" answers are fatal for relativity. The consequences of Einstein's 1905 false light postulate are inherently contradictory.

Pentcho Valev

Here's to the enigma of Einsteinians:

Supposedly our galaxy has been accelerated to near 'c', as having been
moving away from other distant galaxies in all directions (as though
we're at the center of our universe), and so why are we within our
distorted time warp not cosmologically immortal or in any measurable
way affected by such relative velocity?

A very old question:
How does a constant acceleration of 1 gee simulate gravity when no
such associated mass is going along with or in any way associated with
our spacecraft?

Doesn't this artificially induced gravity via acceleration tend to
validate aether?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”

On Oct 27, 10:10*am, Pentcho Valev wrote:
Doublethink in Einsteiniana is different from (classical) doublethink in Big Brother's world. In classical doublethink truth and lie coexist:

http://www.liferesearchuniversal.com/1984-17
"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. The Party intellectual knows in which direction his memories must be altered; he therefore knows that he is playing tricks with reality; but by the exercise of doublethink he also satisfies himself that reality is not violated. The process has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt. Doublethink lies at the very heart of Ingsoc, since the essential act of the Party is to use conscious deception while retaining the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty. To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary."

Doublethink in Einsteiniana means the power of holding two contradictory interpretations of the same lie in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. Truth does not exist at all. So 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.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/...gwgPartI_Speci...
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/con...ent=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/teachi...s/spacetime_ta...
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...gainst_the_the...
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."

Pentcho Valev

Here's to the enigma of our doublethink Einsteinians:

Supposedly our galaxy has been accelerated to near 'c', as having been
moving away from other distant galaxies in all directions (as though
we're at the center of our universe), and so why are we within our
distorted time warp not cosmologically immortal or in any measurable
way affected by such relative velocity?

A very old question:
How does a constant acceleration of 1 gee simulate gravity when no
such associated mass is going along with or in any way associated with
our spacecraft?

Doesn't this artificially induced gravity via acceleration tend to
validate the cosmic pond of aether that’s everywhere?

Perhaps gravity is simply quantum entangled issue, whereas a change of
velocity or direction by any given mass is simply instantaneously
conveyed to everything within the continuous aether without delay.
How else is gravity artificially created or simulated via
acceleration?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity
Measuring light is simply not the same quanta as the direct
measurement of gravity propagation, of which I would suggest is worth
at least 2c if not quantum entangled as to being instantaneous.

Here’s one for Sheldon Cooper:
How can the very same mass that has always existed not be quantum
entangled?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”