The Twin Paradox Flaw


Twin+Paradox+That+Wasn't.jpg

The Twin Paradox Contradicts Special Relativity Itself

Modern Cosmology is not backed with empirical evidence. If it were the mainstream cosmology would be based on the motionless Ptolemaic model, the one we can actually demonstrate, This is the model that old style planetarium projectors were based on and the geocentric theory correctly models what we experience. The mainstream heliocentric based cosmology is a far cry from the simple Sun centered Universe of Newton and Kepler, having been ad hoc patched to the point of being unrecognizable as heliocentric theory and having evolved into a full blown, stinky brown balloon of big bang inflationary, dark mattered fantasy.

The infamous null result of the Michelson Morley interferometer experiment did not mean the experiment proved that there was no ether. Light and electrical phenomena like magnetism kind of go a long way in showing why a medium would be logically necessary. The idea that the Michelson Morley experiment showed there was no ether is incorrect. This is another example of mainstream university taught apologetics. The experiment was designed to measure the motion of the Earth around the Sun which it could not do. People other than Einstein addressed this problem. Eventually the ad hoc explanation known as the Lorentz Transformation would be used to explain how an experiment that measures no motion actually can show that the Earth is in orbit as claimed. The fallacious ad hoc rationale with no basis in reality means that a moving interferometer is not measurably different from a motionless one. We would logically expect no twin paradox as the twins should age exactly the same. There should be no difference between one clock and the other. This is the whole point of Special Relativity. People seem to enjoy singing parrot choir songs and insisting real experiments prove Einstein correct over and over, yet when we actually examine such claims, they fall apart. In fact the way to really understand why relativity is complete and utter nonsense is to learn about it in order. Start with the original experiment, the Michelson Morley interferometer experiment, and work from there.  In this manner you will be able to see the flaws from the beginning and you can then simply ignore the absurdity that grew from an ad hoc fallacy. Einstein did indeed plagiarize the work of earlier relativists and Einstein himself is more of an author of brainteasers than anything else. His thought experiments reveal self inconsistent flaws that clearly demonstrate the fact that his so-called subsequent theories are nothing but absolute flights of fantastic nonsense. How many people actually go back and read the original work for themselves? Have you read Einstein in his own words?

Relativity and the Twin Paradox I The Great Courses  source: The Great Courses Plus


ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES By A. EINSTEIN June 30, 1905

Einstein himself predicted no Twin Paradox. At least in 1905, there is no reason to think there would be any kind of twin paradox. The whole point of the original principle of relativity was to explain how a motionless interferometer could really be in motion, carrying on a tradition of downside up thinking that goes back to the days of Copernicus.

"In accordance with the principle of relativity the length to be discovered by the operation (a)—we will call it “the length of the rod in the moving system”— must be equal to the length l of the stationary rod. "  Albert Einstein

source: http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuevo_maletin/Einstein_1905_relativity.pdf


Down is Up and 2+2 = 5: Everyone Says It's So, So It Must Be So

The absurd and circularly reasoned Lorentz transformation, the work of minds other than Einstein's, precludes a twin paradox. But that doesn't matter does it? If this were real science it would matter very much but since this is imaginary bullshit, it matters very little. (please excuse my French) Ever notice how so many people seem to love Saint Einstein so much that they never bother to check out any of the original work for themselves? Most people really seem to think it's a good idea to let others do their thinking and reasoning for them. They parrot claims that they do not understand as they lack the education to make sense of it all. Without proper historical context, it is impossible to truly understand a subject, and this modus operand is what passes for education in our dumbed down world.

Heliocentric theory was always a mess despite claims to the contrary. It was always the more complicated model. The heliocentric minded men of history were solar cult worshippers obsessed with looking up at the sky and daydreaming up metaphysical fantasy to explain what they were seeing instead of focusing on what they could actually demonstrate with real experiment. Copernicus is credited with dreaming up a Sun centered cosmos with perfect circular orbits. This proved problematic and instead of sticking to what one can actually demonstrate, IE the geocentric motionless model of a spherical world, these Sun obsessed men had to find ad hoc ways of patching their great and absurdly based work. The real accomplishment of men like Kepler and Newton was how they used mathematics in obviously fallacious ways to "prove" their ideas correct. These men established the fine tradition of using mathematical equation to lie. Obvious incorrectly applied equations become divine laws that cannot be questioned, culminating in obvious Hollywood produced NASA and other global outer space race fictions sold as fact to a dumbed down public long conditioned to believe live action cartoons are real.


Michelson Morley Experiment & Special Relativity [Modern Physics: 2nd Year University Tutoring]  source: Tolson Winters



MM.jpg