Hexenmeister, the mathematically declined:

"Russell" <russell@mdli.com> wrote in message
news:1139597880.751185.257750@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

ESKI wrote:

Can it really be that a discussion group has reached a concensus on a
topic! I hope this is true, and that we can finally put the "twin
paradox" at rest as having been a century-old exercise in faulty
reasoning.

Although I haven't read all of this thread, it looks to me
as if you've misunderstood Bilge.

There are two things to be distinguished here:
1) The prediction of SR that if one particle travels at a high
rate of speed wrt its identical twin, and is accelerated such
that it returns later to the location of that twin, then at the
event of the meeting the age of the accelerated particle is
less than that of its twin.
2) The faulty reasoning that claims, incorrectly, to find a
contradiction in SR because of prediction (1).

The "twin paradox", strictly speaking, is (2). And as Bilge
correctly points out, the reasoning that leads one to call (1)
a contradiction is faulty -- in fact there is no logical problem
at all with SR's prediction that (1) will occur. In other words,
the paradox (2) is faulty reasoning, not prediction (1) itself.

On the other hand, some people when using language loosely
call (1) the "twin paradox"; I think this is the sense in which
you were interpreting Bilge, that is to say, *mis*interpreting
him. You need to be clear that Bilge was talking about (2),
not (1). If you want to talk about (1) specifically, it would
really be better to call it something like "the twin scenario"
or "the twin gedankenexperiment".

Nobody who understands the math of SR -- and Bilge
certainly does -- will deny that (1) is the prediction of SR.

LOL! Bilge knows *****. "The math of SR" - what a fucking joke!
How fucking hard is it to understand high school algebra?

Once you figure out how to count on your fingers, and learn to
make change, you might try moving on to algebra, but in all likelyhood,
algebra will be over your head. The good news is that you can ask anyone
for help, since other people find algebra rather simple.

Oops! You wouldn't know. Ask Cassini the time, *****.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Synchronize/Synchronize.htm

Twin fucking paradox?
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Baez/people_v_Baez.htm

tau = (t-vx/c²)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
tau = (t-uy/c²)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
tau = (t-wz/c²)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²)
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²)
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²)

Right or wrong, dumbfuck?
If one is right they all are, if one is wrong they all are,
pathetic *****.
For v = 0.866c, u = 0.866c, w = 0.866c the resultant velocity is
sqrt( 3/4 + 3/4 +3/4) = 1.5c
Right or wrong, shitforbrains?

Einstein said
eta = y,
zeta = z
because he did not know how to move sideways or up,
anencephalous cretin.
Androcles.