The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry

Science > Physics > The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 1

Topic:	Science > Physics
User:	""
Date:	27 Feb 2005 04:59:34 PM
Object:	The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry

The Symmetry:
Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins on each
one.
One of each twin departs at c/3 relative to his platform and travels
1/2 his invariant time to the other platform and 1/2 his other
invariant time returns with the other platform at c/3.
Before the platforms intersect, from 1000km away they proportionally
reduce their velocity so that the new velocity difference is zero upon
intersection, NOW the platforms are together.
PART_1 of the Impossibility:
The twins do INDEED end-up fully capable of comparing ALL their clocks
simultaneously at the end within the same inertial reference frame. And
it is IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE ANY LOGICAL CLOCK READING.
Just plug-in absolutely any clock rate for both Platform's invariant
times and it will always be impossible...try it.
1. The 2nd half of both voyages each immigrant twin must AGE LESS by
the same amount as the first half of his trip = large percentage = 50%
of aging time.
2. The 2nd half of both voyages each immigrant twin & platform's clock
must tick at the same rate and therefore age at the SAME rate.
Therefore it is IMPOSSIBLE for each immigrant twin & platform to both
age less than the other immigrant twin & platform and as demonstrated
they do all INDEED compare clocks at the END.
(The clocks values ****WILL NOT**** magically change values at the last
1000km stretch when they proportionally reduce their velocities to meet
each other, THE CLOCK RATES AND VALUES ARE MORE AFFECTED DURING THE
ENTIRE VOYAGE).
PART_2 of the Mathematical Impossibililty:
Because during the final 1/2 which is the return voyage each plaform
beats at the same rate as its new immigrant twin therefore:
invariant_t1 = gamma2(invariant_t2)
invariant_t2 = gamma1(invariant_t1)
2. Since gamma1 = gamma2 since both v = c/3 therefore reducing equation
#1:
invartiant_t1/invatiant_t2= invariant_t2/invariant_t1
***Which is MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE and therefore the RELATIVISTS are
going crazy since this means the end of RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION****
Anyone can "try" to plug-in their own numbers to "try" and determine
what the final clock comparison readings will be and IT WILL NOT WORK.
UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.
.

User: "Sam Wormley"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 05:17:48 PM

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 05:58:37 PM

wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins on each
one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html>
Hafele-Keating Experiment
http://www.hawaii.edu/suremath/SRtwinParadox.html
<http://physics.syr.edu/courses/modules/LIGHTCONE/twins.html>
Twin Paradox
If empirical reality says you are an idiot, then you are an empirical
idiot. EVerything works by the book, idiot, including strong field
observations,
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
<http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2003-5/index.html>
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 06:44:10 PM

Uncle Al wrote:

guskz@hotmail.com wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins on

each

one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.

Stop rambling and prove I'm an idiot.
All the variables and factors for the math have been provided, YOU WILL
NOT BE ABLE TO COME TO A LOGICAL NUMERICAL ANSWER to what the four
twins clock readings will be.... IMPOSSIBLE.
FOR THAT REASON Relativity's TIME DILATION THEORY MUST END.
Come to a logical numerical computation for all four twins clock (with
the gvien inital settings) AND YOU WILL NOT READ FROM ME FOR AN ENTIRE
MONTH!
.

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 07:53:43 PM

wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins on

each

one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.

Stop rambling and prove I'm an idiot.

All the variables and factors for the math have been provided, YOU WILL
NOT BE ABLE TO COME TO A LOGICAL NUMERICAL ANSWER to what the four
twins clock readings will be.... IMPOSSIBLE.

FOR THAT REASON Relativity's TIME DILATION THEORY MUST END.

Come to a logical numerical computation for all four twins clock (with
the gvien inital settings) AND YOU WILL NOT READ FROM ME FOR AN ENTIRE
MONTH!

Idiot.
Don't you even suspect that cumulatively more than 100,000 physics
grad students and their teachers have pondered this primitive point
and reached some sort of satisfactory conclusion? GET YOUR LAZY *****
IN GEAR AND FIND IT. You are missing the big picture. You haven't
even expended the minimal effort to learn it is called the Twin
Paradox.
The rule is that the one who travels more (space) is the one who ages
less. The one who goes forward and then backwards travels more
undeniable from any reference frame. The same is true for somebody in
a circular orbit. The non-inertial reference frame ages more slowly.
The ratio by which the two have aged at the end when they are back
together again is the same in all reference frames:
ratio = sqrt(t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2)/t (with units of c=1)
Acceleration breaks the symmetry of who ages faster. To accomplish
that, the acceleration can occur before the clocks (or the twins)
exist. Only reference frames matter.
Inertial frames with relative *velocities* pursue different paths
through spacetime in Special Relativity. No clock anomaly is apparent
in any of them until clocks are compared (by all being local when you
do it, initial calibration then experiment). Acceleration is
irrelevant in SR to the running of the clocks (as opposed to
Equivalence Principle acceleration in GR). Acceleration is necessary
at some arbitrary time not associated with the experiment itself for
breaking the symmetry of clock observation. Acceleration defines
which reference frame takes what path through spacetime - even if it
occurs when the clocks are *off* (or not even constructed yet, or
destroyed) - so the situation is NOT symmetric. There is a difference
between the reference frame and any clocks in it.
1) Acceleration is an absolute measurement and it does not require a
clock to make the measurement (e.g, simultaneous displacement of three
independent orthogonally cantilevered masses). There is no doubt who
was accelerated even if a clock was not running/existing during
aceleration. Any past accelerated reference frame has a different
mixture of space and time from an unaccelerated frame.
2) Past acceleration is irrelevant to the running of present clocks,
but not to the mixture of space and time in the reference frame that
said clocks measure. This is an important subtlety and the key to the
whole thing. You cannot synchronize clocks except by having them
local. That's what Relativity demands. If they are local at the
start, you can tell who was naughty thereafter without needing a clock
to do the acceleration measurement. Accelerometers are not clocks.
EXAMPLE: We have three identical clocks that are off (a state of not
running, or of not even having been fabricated) and zeroed. Each
clock has/will have a very short toggle jiggger switch sticking out.
We load them (or their parts, or ore and a smelter and a machine shop)
in individual spaceships and set up the experiment.
CLOCK 1: That's our clock. It sits stationary in our inertial
reference frame with a little jigger sticking out. Touch the jigger
and the "off" state becomes "on" or the "on" state becomes "off."
Clock 1 is "off." Or we can build it from parts just before we need
it, and in the "off" state, zeroed.
CLOCK 2: In a spaceship traveling at 0.999c relative to our inertial
frame of reference. Clock 2 is "off." It was built after all
acceleration ceased, and set to zero. It skims past Clock 1 (our
clock), the jiggers touch, both Clocks 1 and 2 are now "on" and
locally synchronized by touching. Elapsed time accumulates in each
one. The situation is NOT symmetric! We have an accelerometer and
they have an acelerometer. We know who accelerated to set up the
experiment even if there wasn't a clock present when it happened.
CLOCK 3: In a spaceship traveling at 0.999c relative to our inertial
frame of reference, but 180 degrees counter in direction to Clock 2.
Clock 3 is zeroed and "off." It was built after all acceleration
ceased, and set to zero.
Some arbitrary time after Clocks 1 and 2 synchronize and turn "on" by
touching, Clocks 2 and 3 brush past each other, touching jiggers.
Clock 2 is now "off," Clock 3 is now "on." Write down the elapsed
time in now "off" Clock 2, then smash the clock with a sledgehammer.
Or melt it down, or toss it over the side. The spaceship with Clock 3
is returning back over the path taken by the spaceship with Clock 2.
CLOCK 1: That's our clock. It sits stationary in our inertial
reference frame with a little jigger sticking out. Clock 3 rushes
past, jiggers touch. Clocks 3 and 1 are now off. All clocks are
off. No clock has accelerated while "on" or even while existing.
Write down elapsed times, smash each clock with a sledgehammer. Or
melt them down, or toss them.
BOTTOM LINE: Get all three slips of paper together... Accelerate as
you need. Or send all the results to all three folks by radio and
never decelerate. All clocks have been smashed, melted, tossed.
Their elapsed times were written down. The numbers on the papers
won't change when you accelerate or broadcast the data.
Acceleration is arguably General Relativity, as we did setting up the
experiment. It is irrelevant to the clocks. No clock is running or
even exists during acceleration. Numbers written on slips of paper
are unaffected by Special or General Relativity. One could as easily
build the clocks from their component parts after setting up the
experiment. No clock exists during acceleration up or down. The
*reference frame* has accelerated in the past, and that changes its
mix of space and time relative to an unaccelerated frame. The clocks
are passive observers in a presently unaccelerated setting.
Finally.... compare elapsed times. Elapsed time #2=#3 (straight line
motion for both traveling clocks, no acceleration!), but elapsed time
#2+#3 does not equal #1, the local stationary reference frame
summation. The sum of #2+#3 elasped time is only about 4.5% that than
of #1's accumulated elapsed time. You have the Twin Paradox (or,
Triplets) without any running clock having been accelerated - or
having even existed during acceleration up or down.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 11:43:24 AM

Uncle Al wrote:

2) Past acceleration is irrelevant to the running of present clocks,

MUCH MUCH MORE ****IMPORTANTLY*****:
Present acceleration is irrelevant to the running of past clocks.
MEANING:
As the traveling twin returns say at -c/3 to his home brother, HE WILL
STILL REMAIN YOUNGER THAN HIS BROTHER ***IF INSTEAD*** of reducing his
velocity to zero, his brother accelerates to -c/3 to meet him!!!!!
SOLELY FOR THIS REASON THE GIVEN DOUBLE PLATFORM TWIN PARADOX
DEMONSTRATES THE END OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY....the variables,factors
and settings have been given ....do the math where at the end all four
clocks are compared, you will not be able to come to a logical
tabulated answer.
.

User: "Gregory L. Hansen"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 12:03:25 PM

In article <1109612604.706615.121910@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>,
<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

2) Past acceleration is irrelevant to the running of present clocks,

MUCH MUCH MORE ****IMPORTANTLY*****:

Present acceleration is irrelevant to the running of past clocks.

MEANING:

As the traveling twin returns say at -c/3 to his home brother, HE WILL
STILL REMAIN YOUNGER THAN HIS BROTHER ***IF INSTEAD*** of reducing his
velocity to zero, his brother accelerates to -c/3 to meet him!!!!!

SOLELY FOR THIS REASON THE GIVEN DOUBLE PLATFORM TWIN PARADOX
DEMONSTRATES THE END OF EINSTEIN'S RELATIVITY....the variables,factors
and settings have been given ....do the math where at the end all four
clocks are compared, you will not be able to come to a logical
tabulated answer.

You're aware of the identically accelerated twins paradox, right? The one
in front ages faster.
--
"A nice adaptation of conditions will make almost any hypothesis agree
with the phenomena. This will please the imagination but does not advance
our knowledge." -- J. Black, 1803.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 10:33:07 PM

Uncle Al wrote:

guskz@hotmail.com wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

guskz@hotmail.com wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins

each

one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.

Stop rambling and prove I'm an idiot.

All the variables and factors for the math have been provided, YOU

WILL

NOT BE ABLE TO COME TO A LOGICAL NUMERICAL ANSWER to what the four
twins clock readings will be.... IMPOSSIBLE.

FOR THAT REASON Relativity's TIME DILATION THEORY MUST END.

Come to a logical numerical computation for all four twins clock

(with

the gvien inital settings) AND YOU WILL NOT READ FROM ME FOR AN

ENTIRE

MONTH!

SNIP

OK: You know the twin paradox, twin travels at c/3 and returns at -c/3
therefore t_traveler = gamma (t_stay_at_home) where gamma uses v = c/3

*****> Acceleration breaks the symmetry of who ages faster. To
accomplish

that, the acceleration can occur before the clocks (or the twins)
exist. Only reference frames matter.

Do Not be a coward then...you know the arithmetics, Give Us exactly
what will the clocks read if INSTEAD:
as the traveling TWIN returns home he does not DECELARATE but instead
keeps his return velocity contant at -c/3 and the TWIN who
stayed-at-home accelerates to -c/3 just as the traveling TWIN passes
by....WHAT WILL BE BOTH CLOCK READINGS!
You probably don't know and just repeat already known knowledge about
time dilation. There's a difference between reading and doing.....
.

User: "RP"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 01:00:39 AM

wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins

each

one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.

Stop rambling and prove I'm an idiot.

All the variables and factors for the math have been provided, YOU

WILL

(with

the gvien inital settings) AND YOU WILL NOT READ FROM ME FOR AN

ENTIRE

MONTH!

SNIP

OK: You know the twin paradox, twin travels at c/3 and returns at -c/3
therefore t_traveler = gamma (t_stay_at_home) where gamma uses v = c/3

*****> Acceleration breaks the symmetry of who ages faster. To
accomplish

that, the acceleration can occur before the clocks (or the twins)
exist. Only reference frames matter.

Do Not be a coward then...you know the arithmetics, Give Us exactly
what will the clocks read if INSTEAD:

as the traveling TWIN returns home he does not DECELARATE but instead
keeps his return velocity contant at -c/3 and the TWIN who
stayed-at-home accelerates to -c/3 just as the traveling TWIN passes
by....WHAT WILL BE BOTH CLOCK READINGS!

You probably don't know and just repeat already known knowledge about
time dilation. There's a difference between reading and doing.....

Assume a single inertial observational frame in which to perform all
measurements. Calculate clock differences from those measurements. All
inertial observers will agree.
_______________________________________
The use of momentary comoving inertial frames, or MCIF's (Newton's
method) is sufficient to account for the behavior of clocks that are
accelerated wrt the observational inertial frame. For uniform
acceleration the average ticking rate offset of the accelerated clock
over the space-like interval is given by:
delta_t' = (r/w) * sqrt(1 - w^2/c^2)
where
w = average (weighted) velocity.
This reduces to
delta_t' = sqrt(r^2/w^2 - r^2/c^2)
Since the weightedness of w hasn't yet been defined, this equation can
be taken as a generalized equation, i.e. there exists some w such that
the equation above gives the correct time offset over a given
space-like interval r, regardless of the nature of the motion of the
clock over r.
When w = v, i.e. when the velocity is constant, the equation reduces to:
delta_t' = sqrt(r^2/v^2 - r^2/c^2) = (r/v)sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
= delta_t/gamma
Which you should recognize as the special case solution for a
uniformly moving clock, i.e. as derived directly from the lorentz
transform.
Keeping in mind that w is a weighted average, it is left as a
possibility that even though two clocks may leave x1 at the same
instant t1 wrt K and arrive at x2 at the same instant t2 wrt K, these
clocks won't necessarily have accrued equal elapsed times.
Acceleration involves a tilt of the time axis, and thus differences in
lengths of the respective geodesics. Complicated motions require
integrating over the entire path, which can be extremely difficult
given irregular motion. This is why uniform acceleration is usually
used in the arguments.
Though Dirk supposes that inverting the resultant ticking rate
relationships that were derived via integration provides for events
wrt an accelerated frame, entirely in the context of SR, his
assumption is incorrect. The assumption that some acceleration
dependent component of the relative ticking rates is absolute
(non-reciprocated) is an assumption of GR. Thus though the basics of
GR time offsets can be derived from the logical requirements set forth
by SR, it doesn't follow that SR is sufficient to account for
observations made from accelerated frames, only that SR taken with the
logical requirement of non-reciprocity in the case of relative
acceleration is sufficient to derive GR time offsets. OTOH, this is
exactly how Einstein derived GR offsets as well (Rotating disk
argument), but Einstein had the sense to note that SR wasn't
sufficient, since the derivation required an additional assumption
(non-reciprocity in the gravitational field) in order to resolve the
paradox.
Others are free to make corrections and/or additions to the above
explanation.
Richard Perry
.

User: "Dirk Van de moortel"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 04:44:31 AM

"RP" <no_mail_no_spam@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:38ftn5F5n9pjqU1@individual.net...
[snip]

Though Dirk supposes that inverting the resultant ticking rate
relationships that were derived via integration provides for events
wrt an accelerated frame, entirely in the context of SR, his
assumption is incorrect.

*What* am I supposing?
"that inverting the resultant ticking rate relationships that
were derived via integration provides for events wrt an
accelerated frame, entirely in the context of SR"
?
Perry, you are making progress, but you are still talking
through your back end.

The assumption that some acceleration
dependent component of the relative ticking rates is absolute
(non-reciprocated) is an assumption of GR.

So you still should have that careful look at
http://www.geocities.com/slithytove5/AccelClocks.htm
[followup set to sci.physics.relativity]
Dirk Vdm
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 11:33:48 AM

RP wrote:

When w = v, i.e. when the velocity is constant, the equation reduces

to:

delta_t' = sqrt(r^2/v^2 - r^2/c^2) = (r/v)sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2)
= delta_t/gamma

The above equation only works with ONE INERTIAL FRAME, the case given
for the double plaform twin paradox has two reference frames:
1. The LAWS of Relativity allow more than one reference frame as
demonstrated by the equation w = (u+v)/(1+uv/c^2).
2. Likewise not only velocity but also time (clocks) are allowed to
have more than one reference frame.
3. Both platforms of the double platform twin paradox have NEVER met
each other yet and by the LAWS of Relatvitity Both Platforms are
legally permitted to each establish his clock and platform as his
Inertial Reference Frame.
4. Both Platform is legally permitted to expect HIS travelling twin to
age less.
5. Both Platforms come to a relavistic full stop at the End just as
they intersect and compare all their clocks.
The variables have been given and it is impossible to come to an
arithmaticly sound answer for the 4 clock readings at the End, try it,
you can't because it's impossible!
Therefore it means the End of Einsteind Relativity, paving the way for
perhaps absolute space.
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	27 Feb 2005 06:50:53 PM

wrote:

Uncle Al wrote:

guskz@hotmail.com wrote:

The Symmetry:

Two platforms approach each other at c/3 with a pair of twins on

each

one.

[snip crap]

UNTIL THEN THIS MEANS THE END OF RELATIVITY'S TIME DILATION.

Hopeless ineducable idiot.

Stop rambling and prove I'm an idiot.

All the variables and factors for the math have been provided, YOU

WILL

(with

the gvien inital settings) AND YOU WILL NOT READ FROM ME FOR AN

ENTIRE

MONTH!

Of course you must also adhere to the same rules and stay away from
posting to this newsgroup for one month if you fail. You will fail.
FOR THAT REASON Relativity's TIME DILATION THEORY MUST END
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 02:38:59 PM

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it out.
The time dilation between both platforms clocks occurs during the 1st
1/2 of the travel which is t_dilated = gamma (t_invariant) where
velocity = w = (u+v)/(1+uv/c^2)
u = other's platform velocity = -c/3
v = other's twin traveler velocity = -c/3
Thus w = -2c/3/(1+1/9) = -2c/3(9/10) = -6c/10 = -3c/5 = -0.6c
which is almost twice as fast as the original -c/3 and therefore more
dilation per invariant time unit of each platform's time.
In conclusion both traveling twins may have aged less where as MANY
other's would post no and there must only be one platform as the
Invariant inertial reference frame.
.

User: "Dirk Van de moortel"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 05:13:52 PM

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1109623138.951674.139550@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it out.

Since you made your baboon entry, not many people
care to even look at your *****.
You might try to use a new phoney name and be a bit
polite.
Dirk Vdm
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 10:07:58 PM

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109623138.951674.139550@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it out.

Since you made your baboon entry, not many people
care to even look at your *****.
You might try to use a new phoney name and be a bit
polite.

Dirk Vdm

Many replied and they should have immediately found the error if they
know their relativity yet I was the only one who found it....now if you
find my entries as baboon just because I make errors in them than
that's shamefull.
.

User: "Dirk Van de moortel"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	01 Mar 2005 01:48:58 AM

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1109650078.188424.185160@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109623138.951674.139550@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it out.

Since you made your baboon entry, not many people
care to even look at your *****.
You might try to use a new phoney name and be a bit
polite.

Dirk Vdm

No, idiot.
You have been a barking baboon from the very start.
It got slightly better, but you still are the same ignorant
and arrogant Peter K. that you pretended to be before.
It is time to start all over again with another phoney name.
Dirk Vdm
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	01 Mar 2005 10:04:40 PM

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109650078.188424.185160@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109623138.951674.139550@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it

out.

Since you made your baboon entry, not many people
care to even look at your *****.
You might try to use a new phoney name and be a bit
polite.

Dirk Vdm

Many replied and they should have immediately found the error if

they

know their relativity yet I was the only one who found it....now if

you

find my entries as baboon just because I make errors in them than
that's shamefull.

If I write E=MX^4 you would climb over a cow to point the error, you
didn't, yet you read the threads to find I said I found the error. I
found the error first and it's a common simple error.
Of course one can always say: I didn't care to correct. The truth is
you would have pointed to the error and INSULTED ME (yet you pretend
I'm the one of bad character). I found the error instead of the many
others who posted ...so whose more intelligent: forget it you know your
answer.
Once no respect always no respect.
.

User: "Dirk Van de moortel"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	02 Mar 2005 03:11:10 AM

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1109736280.136091.285680@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109650078.188424.185160@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

<guskz@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:1109623138.951674.139550@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

Found out the simple error, I'm shocked no one could point it

out.

Since you made your baboon entry, not many people
care to even look at your *****.
You might try to use a new phoney name and be a bit
polite.

Dirk Vdm

Many replied and they should have immediately found the error if

they

know their relativity yet I was the only one who found it....now if

you

find my entries as baboon just because I make errors in them than
that's shamefull.

If I write E=MX^4 you would climb over a cow to point the error, you
didn't, yet you read the threads to find I said I found the error. I
found the error first and it's a common simple error.

Whatever. I'm not even interested in your errors.
I'm sure you make lots of them for the simple reason
that you advertized your terminal stupidity loud and
clear when you first opened the door.

Of course one can always say: I didn't care to correct. The truth is
you would have pointed to the error and INSULTED ME (yet you pretend
I'm the one of bad character). I found the error instead of the many
others who posted ...so whose more intelligent: forget it you know your
answer.

Once no respect always no respect.

Right, the blessing of Prejudice: we know that you are
an idiot, so we don't have to bother trying to help :-)
Dirk Vdm
.

User: "Alex"
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 11:05:07 AM

The twin paradox is not symmetrical.
The symmetrical situation occurs when both twins leave each other and
both turn at the half way point.
Your challenge is, from your knowledge of relativistic phase, to work
out the effects of the asymmetry in the twin paradox compared with the
symmetrical situation. (Clue: look at the tilt of the x-axes of the
twins, their 'lines of simultaneity' in the x direction, and work out
what happens as they change direction of tilt during the turn).
Best Wishes
Alex Green
.

User: ""
Title: Re: The END of Relatvity's Time Dilation through Symmetry	28 Feb 2005 11:19:05 AM

Alex wrote:

The twin paradox is not symmetrical.

This is not the twin paradox but the double platform twin paradox.

The symmetrical situation occurs when both twins leave each other and
both turn at the half way point.

Your challenge is,

I already gave a challenge and NO one has computed it because it cannot
be computed therefore it means the End of Time Dilation.
The variables are given, just plug in the numbers if you can...you will
not be able to come to an arithmetic answer....remember according to
the LAWS of Relativity both PLATFORMS have never met each other and by
LAW are both allowed to set their own reference frame and clocks.

from your knowledge of relativistic phase, to work
out the effects of the asymmetry in the twin paradox compared with

the

symmetrical situation. (Clue: look at the tilt of the x-axes of the
twins, their 'lines of simultaneity' in the x direction, and work out
what happens as they change direction of tilt during the turn).

Best Wishes

Alex Green

Page 1 of 1

Post reply

Surprising gravitational symmetry of the Solar system
Symmetry Forms the Basis of Truth
Symmetry question
Re: More symmetry between derivative and antiderivative?
LQG in 4 spacetime with the double arrow of time, and lorentz symmetry.
Symmetry, group theory and Differential equations
Symmetry Field- In my Xray Laser, that is still forsale
Gravity Symmetry

Symmetry in Nuclear Scattering
Symmetry of Time
Symmetry Forms the Basis of Truth
The super symmetry
Hanson: Gravity Arises from Broken Charge Symmetry
Symmetry and conservation
New Paper: Magnetic Monopoles and Duality Symmetry Breaking in Maxwell's Electrodynamics

NEWER

pg.1612 pg.1232 pg.940 pg.716 pg.544 pg.412 pg.311 pg.234 pg.175 pg.130 pg.96 pg.70 pg.50 pg.35 pg.24 pg.16 pg.10 pg.6 pg.3 pg.1

OLDER