1. If one of the twin brothers rides on a rocket, makes a U-turn while moving at sub-light speed, and returns to meet again, the time progress of the one who moved by rocket will be delayed.
2. If the twin brothers ride on a rocket in the opposite direction, move at sub-light speed, make a U-turn at the same time, proceed in the opposite direction and meet again, the progress of both times will be the same.
Is it a contradiction of special relativity that asymmetric motion 1 and symmetric motion 2 are not the same?
Yes!
Special relativity is wrong!
You can find the demonstration in my profile.
There is a local medium around all masses which (together) produce a local reference frame. Within this reference frame, the mass increase and the delay of action at high speeds are correct. There is also a deformation of the EM-field around a charged particle.
JES
No, it's, just, the, expected, result, of using inconsistent mathematics.
The consistent mathematical formulation is known, so there's no excuse doing meaningless calculations, that translate to meaningless statements.
It’s remarkable that the fact that two curves, in flat spacetime, can’t both be geodesics, seems not to be as well known as it ought to be; as is the fact that a geodesic between two spacetime points maximizes the proper time (that’s a Lorentz invariant quantity) between the two points.
These two propositions are trivial to prove, so there's, really, no excuse in pretending not to understand their consequences.
Dear Stam
I suggest that you read the demonstration that relativity theories are wrong (you can find it in my profile).
May be then you stop to make stupid comments.
JES
Well, if time and space are equivalent and the space-time transformation (Lorentz transformation) is correct, 1 and 2 should have the same result.
Dear Shinsuke Hamaji ,
Time and space are not equivalent and Lorentz transformation has nothing to do with either.
JES
Dear Stellan Gustafsson,
Einstein's theory of relativity collapses if space-time transformations do not hold except for constant velocity linear motion.
Dear Shinsuke Hamaji ,
The formulas of Einstein's theory of relativity can be used if you replace the "inertial reference frame" with the "local reference frame" i.e., the velocity must be relative to the local reference frame. In the case of the Earth, you can simply use the laboratory. If you use any other system of reference, you will get it wrong. You have a demonstration in my profile.
JES
Dear Shinsuke Hamaji
No, it is not. Motion is not merely relative. That is a characteristic of both, Newtonian mechanics and relativistic mechanics.
Both theories are based on the existence of Newton's absolute space.
They are different because relativity rejects Newton's absolute time.
The biggest problem of theoretical physics is that Einstein's relativity is considered holy and sacred since it venerates the light.
Here is the strongest disproof of Einstein's relativity, read it objectively :
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347203242_The_correct_formulas_of_Michelson-Morley_experiment
Dear Akram Louiz ,
Interesting idea but, the light speed is constant relative to the local reference frame (see my profile). So, if I look at your experiment, from my point of view, I would say that the energy (wavelength) of the photon must change when bouncing off the moving mirror, whereas the light speed remains constant.
JES
Dear Stellan Gustafsson ,
Actually, the principle of relativity which states that "the light speed Never changes due to the reference frame" is a result of the Michelson Morley experiment. And since my article tests the experiment, then I have the right to consider that the light is a normal wave and that the photon is a normal particle.
Dear Akram Louiz ,
Ok!
Are you aware that the photon and the EM-wave are separate phenomena?
The photon is indeed a particle whereas the EM-wave is a "vibration of the medium".
JES
Dear Stellan Gustafsson
Yes, that's the double Slit experiment. The Planck constant allows to understand the lightwave as a wave and also as quanta.
Dear Akram Louiz,
You are misunderstanding.
Newton has prepared absolute time and relative time.
Also, Galileo's physics has nothing to do with absolute time.
Therefore, it is not necessary to eliminate the absolute rest coordinate system and still eliminate ether.
In MM experiments, ether can create a light velocity invariant system.
ｘ Ether wind: Absolute rest coordinate system + ether
〇 Speed of light invariant system: relative time + ether
Assuming the special principle of relativity to this, the global light velocity is invariant without ether.
Is it a contradiction of Euclidean geometry that the length of one side of a triangle is less than the length of the other two sides?
The twin "paradox" is just an analogue of the triangle inequality.
It does, in fact, prevent a thorough understanding of the objective reality of the world. Relativistic dynamics and kinematics are difficult to reconcile due to a fundamental flaw in the quasi-symmetric Lorentz transformation of forces. It's also crucial to bear in mind that, in connection to the subject of this investigation, a number of prior studies have shown the special relativity problem about the rotation of reference systems with just asymmetries in kinematics.
Answer to the original question:
No, it is not. Why? Because relativistic mechanics as well as Newtonian mechanics (and even GR) are not "relationist" theories, i.e., they do not treat the motion of two objects merely as a relative (symmetric) motion between them. Both theories are based on the concept of Newton's absolute space. The difference is that SRT rejects the notion of absolute time.
So in the problem of the twin brothers that you stated, the theory predicts different results because both cases are objectively different.
A pure relationist theory would predict the same result in both cases predicting that the twins should age the same in both cases.
Although both theories are logically consistent (relationist and relativist) only one is empirically adequate.
Actually, the relativity of Einstein was the lie of the twentieth century that has not been yet defeated despite the two World wars in Europe. Hence, I published a Physics letter about this matter and I explained many facts about this problem of light. I hope that you will read objectively this letter in order to be convinced that the developed countries dare lie to the peoples of the World who are cultivated enough to know. I added in this letter also a remark about the permeability and permittivity of Maxwell equations with a little suggestion. Here is the link :
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369143082_Physics_letter_Cosmical_observations_and_experiments_against_the_relativistic_explanations_of_the_Doppler_effect_and_the_Gravitational_effect_of_the_light
- Badges
- Science topic