[General] STR twin Paradox

[Wolfgang Baer]

I cannot answer everyone individually but I realize I have not been 
clear enough so I’ll make a few comments on your responses and try 
again. Please see the write-up after the comments and let me know if I 
made a mistake in calculating the test of Einstein’s theory I included 
at the end.

  John Willamson

No I have not read your 2015 SPIE paper I do not think I ever got a 
Proceedings. But I have no problem with the math or the derivations but 
a more fundamental issue of what kind of reality are we being asked to 
imagine.

  Graham Blackwell

Yes That was my mistake I got the prime and unprimed mixed up it has 
been corrected

  Richard Gauthier

That is exactly it in a symmetric experiment both twins clocks run the 
same , the third persons point of view is critical.

  Hodge

Yes of course it has to be the right clock, a pendulum clock won’t work 
in the thought experiment, but there are plenty of reasons it cannot be 
carried out in practice. And you are right to question whether the 
assumption that the dilation principle works for all clocks when we do 
not know the mechanism for all clocks is a streach.

  Chip Akins

The observer plays a pivotal role because it is in his imagination that 
all these thought experiments are carried out

  Chandra

We are thinking along the same lines except that the universal complex 
Tension Field will turn out to be your own


*MY SECOND TRY *


  Ref: The clock paradox in a static homogeneous gravitational field URL
  *https://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0604025*


  This is a very complex analysis involving general relativity. The
  trick in this paper and all I’ve seen is to explain the clock paradox
  using Einstein’s relativity involves two reference frames. In the
  stationary twin’s frame velocity of the moving twin causes the slow
  down of the moving twins clock as predicted by special relativity. In
  the frame of the moving twin his clocks are stationary but gravity
  (using the equivalence principle) from general relativity causes the
  slow down. Here is a picture:


  In the above referenced paper phase 3 and 4 are symmetric to 1 and 2
  so are not separately identified. In both frames the twin 1’s clocks
  in the rocket slow down so there is no paradox. But since both frames
  see the other twin move with the same velocity and acceleration,
  special relativity, as Einstein originally explained it, gave rise to
  a paradox. Einstein required gravity and the equivalence principle to
  explain the asymmetry. This lead to a very complex and I suggest
  incorrect view of reality.


  To understand this we must remember that  points of view of both twins
  and the transformations between them were derived from a 3d person
  perspective that is an absolute background space provided by
  Einstein’s and Lorentz’s imagination. We could add Maxwell and all who
  believe what they see in front of their noses is reality. This is
  wrong. One can never take the observer in this case the 3’d person out
  of consideration. The 3d person never sees or imagines the reality of
  the two twins. He imagines his own interpretation of stimulation as
  objects on a background space that is always supplied by himself.( the
  walls of Platos cave)


  Once one realizes that the imaginings of Einstein were images
  projected on his background display space, (i.e Plato not Aristotle)
  then one can ask what is the difference between the reality of the two
  twins? And to answer this question we can simply ask them. Twin 1
  feels no force. Twin 2 feels a force, we call it gravity.


  The difference between the two twins is simply that the speed of
  electromagnetic interaction depends upon the gravitational field in
  which the physical material of twin 1 or twin 2 or observer 3 is
  subject to. The physical material is NOT the observable objects
  appearing in front of our noses. That is why in the symmetric thought
  experiment I proposed both twins would have identical times on their
  clocks, but both would have their clocks would be delayed relative to
  the 3d person, ( As Gauthier suggested).Now I repeat what I believe to
  be the correct theory:

*Einstein’s special relativity interpretation gives the wrong world view 
of reality. *

The two clocks do not slow down because they are moving relative to each 
other. Their rates are determined by their complete Lagrangian Energy L 
= T-V calculated relative to the observer observing them. In case that 
is a universal 3^d person it is relative to the fixed star shell of the 
universe. The potential gravitational energy of a mass inside the fixed 
stars shell is

Eq. 1)V= -mc^2 = -m∙M_u ∙G/R_u .

Here M_u and R_u are the mass and radius of the star shell and R_u is 
also the Schwarzchild radius of the black hole each of us is living in..

A stationary clock interval is Δt its Lagrangian energy is L= m∙c^2

A moving clock interval is Δt’ its Lagrangian energy is L= ½∙m∙v^2 +m∙c^2

Comparing the two clock rates and assuming the Action is an invariant

Eq. 2)(m∙c^2 ) ∙ Δt = A = _(½∙m∙v^2 +m∙c^2 ) ∙ Δt’

Dividing through by m∙c^2 gives

Eq. 3)Δt = Δt’ ∙ (1 + ½∙v^2 /c^2 )

Which to first order approximation is equal to

Eq. 4)Δt = Δt’/(1 - v^2 /c^2 )^1/2

Since the second order terms are on the order of v^4 /c^4 I believe 
Einstein’s theory has not been tested to the second term accuracy. In 
both theories the moving clock interval is smaller when the clock moves 
with constant velocity in the space of an observer at rest.

The additional important point is that equation 1 shows that the speed 
of light is not constant but rather depends upon the gravitational 
potential. The higher the gravitational potential the faster this speed. 
The speed of light is constant in each of our imagination i.e. 
perceptive space but it should be called our individual speed of now.


I often make trivial math mistakes so please correct me if you see a 
problem.


Thanks

Wolf








Dr. Wolfgang Baer
Research Director
Nascent Systems Inc.
tel/fax 831-659-3120/0432
E-mail wolf at NascentInc.com


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170610/fbada158/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: iblejofemnldpcgo.png
Type: image/png
Size: 33777 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.natureoflightandparticles.org/pipermail/general-natureoflightandparticles.org/attachments/20170610/fbada158/attachment.png>