ABSURD TIME DILATION IN EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY

According to Einstein's relativity, a single moving clock consecutively meeting synchronous stationary clocks runs more slowly than them, in the sense that the difference between the reading of the stationary clock just being met and that of the single moving clock gradually increases with the number of meetings (in the picture, the moving clock agrees with the reading of the leftmost clock as it passes by but when it passes the rightmost, it reads much less):


http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teachi...ty/clocks..gif


Einstein's relativity also predicts that, if the single clock is STATIONARY and the multiple synchronous clocks MOVING, it is again the single (stationary this time) clock that is running more slowly (in the sense defined above).

The single MOVING clock is equivalent to the travelling twin's clock - since it is running slow, the travelling twin proves younger than his stationary brother at the end of the journey.

The single STATIONARY clock is equivalent to the stationary twin's clock - since it is running slow, the stationary twin proves younger than his travelling brother at the end of the journey.

Clearly Einstein's relativity is an inconsistency (absurdity).

Pentcho Valev

Consider synchronous clocks (ants in the picture) travelling with constant speed along a rectangular line and passing a single stationary clock located in the middle of one of the sides of the rectangle:

http://www.wpclipart.com/page_frames...e_portrait.png

Einstein's relativity predicts that the single stationary clock runs more slowly than the travelling clocks it consecutively meets, in the sense that the difference between the reading of the travelling clock just being met and that of the single stationary clock gradually increases with the number of meetings.

If clocks are replaced with ants, Einstein's relativity predicts that the single stationary ant is gradually getting younger than the travelling brothers it consecutively meets, in the sense that the difference between the age of the travelling ant just being met and that of the single stationary ant gradually increases with the number of meetings. This contradicts the traditional twin paradox solution.

Clearly Einstein's relativity is an absurdity.

Pentcho Valev

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, by A. Einstein, June 30, 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."

Einsteinians,

Time dilation is MUTUAL isn't it? Here we have two clocks in relative motion, and either of them is running slow as judged from the system of the other (so special relativity says). Then why does Einstein:

1. say that the clock moved from A to B lags behind the clock at B?

2. fail to say that the clock at B lags behind the clock moved from A to B?

Is Einstein extremely honest in this case?

Pentcho Valev