Einstein's spacetime is a century-old idiocy

Einstein's spacetime (Lorentz transformation equations) entails symmetrical time dilation - either clock is slow as judged from the other clock's system. This is idiotic, not even wrong - the readings of the two clocks are incommensurable. If Einstein had honestly derived this in 1905, his paper would not even have been published. Einstein overcame the difficulty (camouflaged the not even wrongness) by deriving, fraudulently and invalidly of course, asymmetrical time dilation - the moving clock is slow, the stationary one is FAST. Asymmetrical time dilation is both false and invalidly derived but does not involve incommensurability (idiocy) and for that reason sounds much more plausible than symmetrical time dilation:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, A. Einstein, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B."

Nowadays physicists wrestle with the idiocy (symmetrical time dilation) and cry in despair, but continue to fool the gullible world by teaching the fascinating asymmetrical time dilation (moving clocks run slow, twins age differently, etc.):

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Joao Magueijo, Faster Than the Speed of Light, p. 250: "Lee [Smolin] and I discussed these paradoxes at great length for many months, starting in January 2001. We would meet in cafés in South Kensington or Holland Park to mull over the problem. THE ROOT OF ALL THE EVIL WAS CLEARLY SPECIAL RELATIVITY. All these paradoxes resulted from well known effects such as length contraction, time dilation, or E=mc^2, all basic predictions of special relativity. And all denied the possibility of establishing a well-defined border, common to all observers, capable of containing new quantum gravitational effects."

https://www.edge.org/response-detail/26563
Nobel Laureate David Gross observed, "Everyone in string theory is convinced...that spacetime is doomed. But we don't know what it's replaced by."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U47kyV4TMnE
Nima Arkani-Hamed (06:09): "Almost all of us believe that space-time doesn't really exist, space-time is doomed and has to be replaced by some more primitive building blocks."

https://edge.org/response-detail/25477
What scientific idea is ready for retirement? Steve Giddings: "Spacetime. Physics has always been regarded as playing out on an underlying stage of space and time. Special relativity joined these into spacetime... [...] The apparent need to retire classical spacetime as a fundamental concept is profound..."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...elativity.html
John Gribbin: "Einstein's special theory of relativity tells us how the Universe looks to an observer moving at a steady speed. Because the speed of light is the same for all such observers, moving clocks run slow..."

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/...ry?id=32191481
Neil deGrasse Tyson: "We have ways of moving into the future. That is to have time tick more slowly for you than others, who you return to later on. We've known that since 1905, Einstein's special theory of relativity, which gives the precise prescription for how TIME WOULD SLOW DOWN FOR YOU if you are set into motion."

https://cosmosmagazine.com/physical-...l-through-time
"This is the easiest and most practical way to get to the far future - go really fast. According to Einstein’s theory of special relativity, when you travel at speeds approaching the speed of light, time slows down for you relative to the outside world."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O8lBIcHre0
Brian Cox (2:25) : "Moving clocks run slowly"

Pentcho Valev

The marriage of space and time turned out to be an idiocy, and the divorce is unavoidable:

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-185331159.html
"That lecture, by the German mathematician Hermann Minkowski, established a new arena for the presentation of physics, a new vision of the nature of reality redefining the mathematics of existence. The lecture was titled Space and Time, and it introduced to the world the marriage of the two, now known as spacetime. It was a good marriage, but lately physicists passion for spacetime has begun to diminish. And some are starting to whisper about possible grounds for divorce."

http://www.thebatt.com/science-techn...3aa345281.html
"Spacetime is any mathematical model used in physics to explain physical phenomenas of the universe by combining space and time in one continuum. [....] Arkani-Hamed said."Because of the existence of gravity and quantum mechanics, we believe that the concept of spacetime is doomed and there are many simple thought experiments that tell us that space time is doomed."

But the marriage of space and time must be a consequence of some postulate:

http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/20...rs-of-gravity/
"Special relativity is based on the observation that the speed of light is always the same, independently of who measures it, or how fast the source of the light is moving with respect to the observer. Einstein demonstrated that as an immediate consequence, space and time can no longer be independent, but should rather be considered a new joint entity called "spacetime."

Logic says that, if an idiotic consequence has been deduced from a postulate, then the postulate is false (reductio ad absurdum). Is Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate false, Einsteinians? Einsteinians' reaction to the question:

http://www.infonetworkmarketing.org/...anza-paure.jpg

Pentcho Valev